Hi, I feel like this should be fairly simple but I just can't seem to get it! I basically want to update multiple records using a sub-query.
I have two tables: objects and temp1. Both have identical column names: Un_ID and SerialNum (one has serial numbers while the other has mostly Null values for the serial numbers). I want to update the SerialNum column in "objects" with the SerialNum column from temp1. The two tables can be linked by un_id's.
Here is my update statement:
UPDATE Objects
SET SerialNumber =
(SELECT SerialNumber
FROM temp1)
WHERE (objects.Un_ID = temp1.un_id)
The error I receive says "column prefix "temp1" does not match a table name or alias name used in the query".
I think the step I am missing is actually liking the two tables in the update statement. Can anyone help?
I do realize that his could be posted in a few spots but I think the answer is in the SQL. I have a ASP.NET page, with a SqlDataSource, Text Box and Calendar Controls. I have the textbox and calendar controls eval'ed to the same sql data source DateTime Field. The text box is formatted eval to small time and the calendars eval has no formatting. ex: <asp:TextBox ID="START_TIME" Text='<%# Eval("EVENT_START","{0:t}") %>' runat=server Width=200></asp:TextBox> I want to merge the two controls; one has the date the other has the time when I update the pages data to the SqlDataSource field EVENT_START. I've tried a couple of methods, but I would like some other opinions. As Sql server only supports date and time together I am storing the two together. I could merge the two together in the code behind on the update button's event handler or merge the two during the update query using parameters. Not that I could get an illegal date for the calendar control, but I could get garbage from the textfield time. So I still would have to do validation on the text field before the SQL server could do the update. There's a few ways to go about this, so I was wondering if anyone else has figured out an elegant way to handle it. wbochar
How to Insert,Update and delete through script without using merge.I have simple requirement of Deleting,Inserting and Update from one table to other table...Here is the Sample Data
CREATE TABLE #Table1 (ID INT ,Name VARCHAR(30),DATEKEY INT) INSERT INTO #Table1 (ID,Name,DATEKEY)VALUES (1,'Mohan',20131231) INSERT INTO #Table1 (ID,Name,DATEKEY)VALUES (2,'Raj',20131231) INSERT INTO #Table1 (ID,Name,DATEKEY)VALUES (3,'Majja',20131231) INSERT INTO #Table1 (ID,Name,DATEKEY)VALUES (4,'Majjaa',20131231)
[code]...
So now i need to update 1st record and add another new record..So i need to update as well as delete the existing data in Target table.
INSERT INTO #Table1 (ID,Name,DATEKEY)VALUES (5,'Macha',20131231)
My output should come like this one :
IDNameDATEKEY 1Mohan20131231 5Macha 20131231
with out using merge how can i handle Update,insert and Delete through TSQL
Hi, I'am using several SQL 2000 servers with different working merge-replications. Actually I wrote a .NET assembly which makes updates to key values in one of the replicated tables:
Ex: update ReplTable set key = -key where key between (1 and 100)
Loop ...... update ReplTable set key = NewKey where key = .... end of loop
Intention is to resort the datarows. So I made two updates to every keyvalue in a very short time. At the ConflictViewer I got messages like:
"The row was inserted at 'ServerX' but could not be inserted at 'ServerY'. Violation of PRIMARY KEY constraint 'PK_xxxx. Cannot insert duplicate key in object 'ReplTable'. "
The replication did only deliver one (the last) update - this makes the violation. Is there a possibility to make the mergeagent known that I wanted to deliver every transaction? Is there a parameter in the agents profile?
I have to load 2 flat file of 2 Gb each in a table. I found 2 ways to do that: - Either I read my 2 file in parallels and I use a merge join transformation to merge my data. Then I load theses datas in my destination table - Or I insert all my first file in the destination table then I read the second file and update my table with the new information.
Based on your experience, what is the best ? I'm running the first way for more than 30 minutes and SSIS is still sorting my datas.... (sort before the merge join)
In the following t-sql 2012 merge statement, the insert statement works but the update statement does not work. I know that is true since I looked at the results of the update statement:
Merge TST.dbo.LockCombination AS LKC1 USING (select LKC.comboID,LKC.lockID,LKC.seq,A.lockCombo2,A.schoolnumber,LKR.lockerId from [LockerPopulation] A JOIN TST.dbo.School SCH ON A.schoolnumber = SCH.type
[Code] ...
Thus can you show me some t-sql 2012 that I can use to make update statement work in the merge function?
I am trying to create Replication Topology (Merge Replication) like below.
Subscriber1 --> Publisher <-- Subscriber2.
I have created both subscribers with Subscription Type as Server with Priority as 75. I am updating the Column A of Row_10 in Subscriber1 on time say 11 am. After i am running the Starting synchronizing agent from Subscriber1. The value propagated to Publisher now publisher contains the latest value in Column A. Uptonow the Subscriber2 is not synchronized with Publisher.
Now in Subscriber2 also Column A of Row_10 is updated say at 11.10 am. Actually now Publisher contains the value from Subscriber1 for that Column and in Subscriber2 we have the same column updated.
Now i am running the Synchronization in Subscriber2, i am getting the result which is not expected. Here Publisher's value is propagated to Subscriber2. But as per real scenario Subscriber2 has the Latest value which is updated on 11.10 AM.
I don't know what am i missing here. Actually merge replication should see the time stamp and it has to decide winner. But here it always considers publisher as a winner and puts the data to Subscriber.
I have got a business logic update conflict handler working, but I have had to work round what appears to be a bug.
Please can someone confirm if this is indeed a bug €“ and if it is a known bug?
My conflict handler needs to take some columns from the publisher row and some from the subscriber row in the event of conflict.
I can quite happily generate a custom dataset which contains the winning row that I want €“ I can see that because I can step through the conflict handler with debug when a conflict occurs.
However, just returning ActionOnUpdateConflict.AcceptCustomConflictData from the UpdateConflictsHandler method does not set the publisher and subscriber columns correctly. I end up with different values on the two databases.
I have found that the only way to get the correct rows on both publisher and subscriber is to create a new ADO connection to the publisher and actually perform an update €“ updating all the modified columns. This now works reliably in my testing.
Fortunately, due to business rules the frequency of update conflicts are likely to be very infrequent, but I would very much like to avoid having to do the €˜unnecessary€™ update.
Notes:
I am using column level tracking €“ but I have seen the problem with row level tracking too I have mainly been using SP1 but have repeated the test on a configuration using the SP2 CTP €“ and the problem occurs there too The problem is not due to complex logic in my code. If the method just sets customDataSet = publisherDataSet.Copy and then returns ActionOnUpdateConflict.AcceptCustomConflictData, the changed and winning publisher values are not sent to the subscriber
I have created a Dynamic Merge statement SCD2 Store procedure , which insert the records if no matches and if bbxkey matches from source table to destination table thne it updates old record as lateteverion 0 and insert new record with latest version 1.
I am getting below error when I ahve more than 1 bbxkey in my source table. How can I ignore this.
BBXkey is nothing but I am deriving by combining 2 columns.
Msg 8672, Level 16, State 1, Line 6
The MERGE statement attempted to UPDATE or DELETE the same row more than once. This happens when a target row matches more than one source row. A MERGE statement cannot UPDATE/DELETE the same row of the target table multiple times. Refine the ON clause to ensure a target row matches at most one source row, or use the GROUP BY clause to group the source rows.
2 Users in 2 locations issue updates to the same table. 1 updating 1 column and the other updating another column. Now in reality the actual Stored Procedure issuing the update statement is passed in all the possible columns that could change and builds an update statement that updates all columns even the ones that havent changed.
Will this break Merge Replications conflict tracking? Or does SQL Server 2005 Merge Replication pickup that in reality the 2 updates only in reality changed the values in 2 columns.
We have a big problem here with merge replication, specifically whenever a schema change occurs. We are replicating schema changes, and triggers/stored procedures. The example is that we changed about 150 stored procedures and about 30 triggers. This is then replicated to the subscriber database (which is also a merge publisher for further remote systems that were offline at the time) over a 10Mb link - hardly low bandwidth. However, the replication process takes about an hour and a half - considering the SQL on the primary server took less than a minute to run this is a big suprise.
We've run a trace to see if we can identitfy what is going on. There seems to be a great number of calls to sp_MSunmarkschemaobject - we are still waiting for a trace to complete to fully analyse this however it looks like it calls this repeatedly for every stored procedure in the database. We are currently re-testing to one of the remote servers with the merge agent set to the slow profile (not much hope that this will alter the poor performance).
This task looks to be excessive - and certainly does not seem to function in a sensible manner. Has anyone else had similar issues or have any suggestions. This is very infuriating as it means that the servers are effectively offline for a minimum of and hour and a half (in fact the remoter servers take over 4 hours !).
Problem Summary: Merge Statement takes several times longer to execute than equivalent Update, Insert and Delete as separate statements. Why?
I have a relatively large table (about 35,000,000 records, approximately 13 GB uncompressed and 4 GB with page compression - including indexes). A MERGE statement pretty consistently takes two or three minutes to perform an update, insert and delete. At one extreme, updating 82 (yes 82) records took 1 minute, 45 seconds. At the other extreme, updating 100,000 records took about five minutes.When I changed the MERGE to the equivalent separate UPDATE, INSERT & DELETE statements (embedded in an explicit transaction) the entire update took only 17 seconds. The query plans for the separate UPDATE, INSERT & DELETE statements look very similar to the query plan for the combined MERGE. However, all the row count estimates for the MERGE statement are way off.
Obviously, I am going to use the separate UPDATE, INSERT & DELETE statements. The actual query plans for the four statements ( combined MERGE and the separate UPDATE, INSERT & DELETE ) are attached. SQL Code to create the source and target tables and the actual queries themselves are below. I've also included the statistics created by my test run. Nothing else was running on the server when I ran the test.
Server Configuration:
SQL Server 2008 R2 SP1, Enterprise Edition 3 x Quad-Core Xeon Processor Max Degree of Parallelism = 8 148 GB RAM
SQL Code:
Target Table: USE TPS; IF OBJECT_ID('dbo.ParticipantResponse') IS NOT NULL DROP TABLE dbo.ParticipantResponse;
I have database on SQL Server 2000 set up with a merge publication.This publication is configured with a number of dynamic filters toreduce the amount of data sent to each client. Each client has ananonymous pull subscription. The merge process can be triggered by thewindows sync manager and my application.To improve performance I have created some helper tables to hold themapping between user login and primary keys of selected entities.For the replicated data to be correct the contents of the helper tablesneeds to be up to date.I need to fire off a stored procedure on the publisher beforereplication starts to verify that this data is up to date. I can notsee any documented way of doing this however I have been experimentingwith some unorthodox systems.Firstly has anyone any ideas?I have been considering adding a trigger to some of the tables used bythe Microsoft replication code - yes I know this is very nasty.My problems arise because executing this stored procedure will causesome data to be updated. In updating data we could create a newgeneration in the database. I must therefore run my stored procedurebefore any the Microsoft code makes any generation checks / updates.Anyone done anything similar, Anyone have any better ideas?Any comments would be gratefully received.
I'm using merge replication to maintain a backup copy of my main (publisher)MSDE database. A push subscription periodically (1 per minute) updates the backup DB. It's intended that if the main db goes down then the backup (subscription) db can be configured as a publisher. This must all be performed via scripting. The initial configuration of the main publisher and subscription is controlled via scripting, which works fine. The problems occur when I try to configure the subsciber to become a publisher. A script is executed on the subscriber but fails at the point when it's configuring the publisher detail. The error is something like "unable to configure a publication for a database setup as an anonymous subscription". I'm guessing that there are subscritpion artifacts added to the database which need to be removed before it can be configured as a new publisher.
update xxx_TableName_xxx set d_50 = 'DE',modify_timestamp = getdate(),modified_by = 1159
where enc_id in
('C24E6640-D2CC-45C6-8C74-74F6466FA262',
'762E6B26-AE4A-4FDB-A6FB-77B4782566C3',
'D7FBD152-F7AE-449C-A875-C85B5F6BB462')
but From linked server this takes 8 minutes????!!!??!:
update [xxx_servername_xxxx].xxx_DatabaseName_xxx.dbo.xxx_TableName_xxx set d_50 = 'DE',modify_timestamp = getdate(),modified_by = 1159
where enc_id in
('C24E6640-D2CC-45C6-8C74-74F6466FA262',
'762E6B26-AE4A-4FDB-A6FB-77B4782566C3',
'D7FBD152-F7AE-449C-A875-C85B5F6BB462')
What settings or whatever would cause this to take so much longer from the linked server?
Edit: Note) Other queries from the linked server do not have this behavior. From the stored procedure where we have examined how long each query/update takes... this particular query is the culprit for the time eating. I thought it was to do specefically with this table. However as stated when a query window is opened directly onto that server the update takes no time at all.
2nd Edit: Could it be to do with this linked server setting? Collation Compatible right now it is set to false? I also asked this question in a message below, but figured I should put it up here.
I am hoping someone can shed light on this odd behavior I am seeing running a simple UPDATE statement on a table in SQL Server 2000. I have 2 tables - call them Table1 and Table2 for now (among many) that need to have certain columns updated as part of a single transaction process. Each of the tables has many columns. I have purposely limited the target column for updating to only ONE of the columns in trying to isolate the issue. In one case the UPDATE runs fine against Table1... at runtime in code and as a manual query when run in QueryAnalyzer or in the Query window of SSManagementStudio - either way it works fine. However, when I run the UPDATE statement against Table2 - at runtime I get rowsaffected = 0 which of course forces the code to throw an Exception (logically). When I take out the SQL stmt and run it manually in Query Analyzer, it runs BUT this is the output seen in the results pane... (0 row(s) affected) (1 row(s) affected) How does on get 2 answers for one query like this...I have never seen such behavior and it is a real frustration ... makes no sense. There is only ONE row in the table that contains the key field passed in and it is the same key field value on the other table Table1 where the SQL returns only ONE message (the one you expect) (1 row(s) affected) If anyone has any ideas where to look next, I'd appreciate it. Thanks
Hi SQL fans,I realized that I often encounter the same situation in a relationdatabase context, where I really don't know what to do. Here is anexample, where I have 2 tables as follow:__________________________________________ | PortfolioTitle|| Portfolio |+----------------------------------------++-----------------------------+ | tfolio_id (int)|| folio_id (int) |<<-PK----FK--| tfolio_idfolio (int)|| folio_name (varchar) | | tfolio_idtitle (int)|--FK----PK->>[ Titles]+-----------------------------+ | tfolio_weight(decimal(6,5)) |+-----------------------------------------+Note that I also have a "Titles" tables (hence the tfolio_idtitlelink).My problem is : When I update a portfolio, I must update all theassociated titles in it. That means that titles can be either removedfrom the portfolio (a folio does not support the title anymore), addedto it (a new title is supported by the folio) or simply updated (atitle stays in the portfolio, but has its weight changed)For example, if the portfolio #2 would contain :[ PortfolioTitle ]id | idFolio | idTitre | poids1 2 1 102 2 2 203 2 3 30and I must update the PortfolioTitle based on these values :idFolio | idTitre | poids2 2 202 3 352 4 40then I should1 ) remove the title #1 from the folio by deleting its entry in thePortfolioTitle table2 ) update the title #2 (weight from 30 to 35)3 ) add the title #4 to the folioFor now, the only way I've found to do this is delete all the entriesof the related folio (e.g.: DELETE TitrePortefeuille WHERE idFolio =2), and then insert new values for each entry based on the new givenvalues.Is there a way to better manage this by detecting which value has to beinserted/updated/deleted?And this applies to many situation :(If you need other examples, I can give you.thanks a lot!ibiza
The Folowing code is not working anymore. (500 error)
Set objRS = strSQL1.Execute strSQL1 = "SELECT * FROM BannerRotor where BannerID=" & cstr(BannerID) objRS.Open strSQL1, objConn , 2 , 3 , adCmdText If not (objRS.BOF and objRS.EOF) Then objRS.Fields("Exposures").Value =objRS.Fields("Exposures").Value + 1 objRS.update End If objRS.Close
The .execute Method works fine
strSQL1 = "UPDATE BannerRotor SET Exposures=Exposures+1 WHERE BannerID=" & cstr(BannerID) objConn.Execute strSQL1
If I have a table with 1 or more Nullable fields and I want to make sure that when an INSERT or UPDATE occurs and one or more of these fields are left to NULL either explicitly or implicitly is there I can set these to non-null values without interfering with the INSERT or UPDATE in as far as the other fields in the table?
EXAMPLE:
CREATE TABLE dbo.MYTABLE( ID NUMERIC(18,0) IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, FirstName VARCHAR(50) NULL, LastName VARCHAR(50) NULL,
[Code] ....
If an INSERT looks like any of the following what can I do to change the NULL being assigned to DateAdded to a real date, preferable the value of GetDate() at the time of the insert? I've heard of INSTEAD of Triggers but I'm not trying tto over rise the entire INSERT or update just the on (maybe 2) fields that are being left as null or explicitly set to null. The same would apply for any UPDATE where DateModified is not specified or explicitly set to NULL. I would want to change it so that DateModified is not null on any UPDATE.
INSERT INTO dbo.MYTABLE( FirstName, LastName, DateAdded) VALUES('John','Smith',NULL)
INSERT INTO dbo.MYTABLE( FirstName, LastName) VALUES('John','Smith')
INSERT INTO dbo.MYTABLE( FirstName, LastName, DateAdded) SELECT FirstName, LastName, NULL FROM MYOTHERTABLE
hi need help how to send an email from database mail on row update from stored PROCEDURE multi update but i need to send a personal email evry employee get an email on row update like send one after one email
i use FUNCTION i get on this forum to use split from multi update
how to loop for evry update send an single eamil to evry employee ID send one email
Hello,I am trying to update records in my database from excel data using vbaeditor within excel.In order to launch a query, I use SQL langage in ADO as follwing:------------------------------------------------------------Dim adoConn As ADODB.ConnectionDim adoRs As ADODB.RecordsetDim sConn As StringDim sSql As StringDim sOutput As StringsConn = "DSN=MS Access Database;" & _"DBQ=MyDatabasePath;" & _"DefaultDir=MyPathDirectory;" & _"DriverId=25;FIL=MS Access;MaxBufferSize=2048;PageTimeout=5;" &_"PWD=xxxxxx;UID=admin;"ID, A, B C.. are my table fieldssSql = "SELECT ID, `A`, B, `C being a date`, D, E, `F`, `H`, I, J,`K`, L" & _" FROM MyTblName" & _" WHERE (`A`='MyA')" & _" AND (`C`>{ts '" & Format(Date, "yyyy-mm-dd hh:mm:ss") & "'})"& _" ORDER BY `C` DESC"Set adoConn = New ADODB.ConnectionadoConn.Open sConnSet adoRs = New ADODB.RecordsetadoRs.Open Source:=sSql, _ActiveConnection:=adoConnadoRs.MoveFirstSheets("Sheet1").Range("a2").CopyFromRecordset adoRsSet adoRs = NothingSet adoConn = Nothing---------------------------------------------------------------Does Anyone know How I can use the UPDATE, DELETE INSERT SQL statementsin this environement? Copying SQL statements from access does not workas I would have to reference Access Object in my project which I do notwant if I can avoid. Ideally I would like to use only ADO system andSQL approach.Thank you very muchNono
It appears to update only the first qualifying row. The trace shows a row count of one when there are multiple qualifying rows in the table. This problem does not exist in JDBC 2000.
I'm having a strange problem that I can't figure out. I have an SQL stored procedure that updates a small database table. When testing the Stored Procedure from the Server Explorer, it works fine. However, when I run the C# code that's supposed to use it, the data doesn't get saved. The C# code seems to run correctly and the parameters that are passed to the SP seem to be okay. No exceptions are thrown. The C# code: SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection(ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings["touristsConnectionString"].ConnectionString); SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand("fort_SaveRedirectURL", conn); cmd.CommandType = CommandType.StoredProcedure; Label accomIdLabel = (Label)DetailsView1.FindControl("lblID"); int accomId = Convert.ToInt32(accomIdLabel.Text); cmd.Parameters.Add("@accomId", SqlDbType.Int).Value = accomId; cmd.Parameters.Add("@path", SqlDbType.VarChar, 250).Value = GeneratePath(); try { conn.Open(); cmd.ExecuteNonQuery(); } catch(Exception ex) { throw ex; } finally { conn.Close(); } The Stored Procedure: ALTER PROCEDURE developers.fort_SaveRedirectURL ( @accomId int, @path varchar(250) ) AS DECLARE @enabled bit, @oldpath varchar(250)
/* Ensure that the accommodation has been enabled */ SELECT @enabled = enabled FROM Experimental_Accommodation WHERE Experimental_Accommodation.id = @accomId
IF (@enabled = 1) BEGIN /* Now check if a path already exists */ SELECT @oldpath = oldpath FROM Experimental_Adpages_Redirect WHERE Experimental_Adpages_Redirect.accom_id = @accomId
IF @oldpath IS NULL BEGIN /* If Path already exists then we should keep the existing URL */ /* Otherwise, we need to insert a new one */ INSERT INTO Experimental_Adpages_Redirect (oldpath, accom_id) VALUES (@path,@accomId) END END RETURN
I'm new to this forum. This 'problem' has occured many times, but I've always found a way around it. I have pages with datagrids, in which a user can edit a certain fields and then update the tables with new data. Lets say when a user edit a Name field and a money field. If he/she left those two fields blank, the table is automatically updated with a <null> (for the name field) and a 0 (for the money field.) Both these columns were set up to allow Null values. Anyone has an idea why they were updated that way? And is there like a standard on how the data types are updated if a field is left blank? Thank you very much.
I want to update two tables in one page. So I created two FormView bound on two SqlDataSource controls, and I create a Update button on the bottom of page. And I writen some codes as below: btnUpate_Click(object sender, EventArgs e){ sqlDataSource1.Update(); sqlDateSource2.Update();} But, the records haven't updated. In SqlDataSource2_Updating() function, I found all the parameters is null. So, how to modify my code to do it.
I want to retrieve the last update time of database. Whenever any update or delete or insert happend to my database i want to store and retrieve that time.
I know one way is that i have to make a table that will store the datetime field and system trigger / trigger that can update this field record whenever any update insert or deletion occur in database.
But i don't know exactly how to do the coding for this?
I have a table where table row gets updated multiple times(each column will be filled) based on telephone call in data.  Initially, I have implemented after insert trigger on ROW level thinking that the whole row is inserted into table will all column values at a time. But the issue is all columns are values are not filled at once, but observed that while telephone call in data, there are multiple updates to the row (i.e multiple updates in the sense - column data in row is updated step by step),
I thought to implement after update trigger , but when it comes to the performance will be decreased for each and every hit while row update.
I need to implement after update trigger that should be fired on column level instead of Row level to improve the performance?
I'm writing a fairly involved stored procedure. In this Stored Procedure, I have an update statement, followed by a select statement. The results of the select statement should be effected by the previous update statement, but its not. When the stored procedure is finish, the update statement seemed to have worked though, so it is working.
I suspect I need something, like a GO statement, but that doesnt seem to work for a stored procedure. Can anyone offer some assistance?
