Replication Field Limit Per Table ??
Oct 26, 2000Does anyone know if there is a limit to the number of fields you can replicate from one table ??
View 1 RepliesDoes anyone know if there is a limit to the number of fields you can replicate from one table ??
View 1 RepliesWhat is the limit of chars you can have in a field of type 'text' ?
View 2 Replies View RelatedHey Everyone, I have what seems to be a unique problem, which I am not sure if it is an ASP problem or an SQL Server issue. I'm making a website that pulls its content from ntext fields within SQL Server 2000. Heres my problem, when I pull the data into the page it cuts off the text from the field at a certain spot. I pulled the data into a variable and did some tests on it, if I run length on it I get 1023 and also if I run length on just the recordset field I also get 1023. But if I check the SIZE of the recordset I get a return of 2046. I have had this problem before with an Access database as well but it seems as if the amount of characters that it cut off at with the access database was in the 200's. I've self taught myself ASP so this could very easily be something I have missed. Same for both Access and SQL Server.
View 4 Replies View RelatedI was asked if there was a limit on the amount of clock time that the Replication agents may be down without snapshotting the subscribers. I think that the only factor is if the MSDB database contains the necessary data to feed a restarted Replication Agent.
Any comments?
my snapshot is exceeding the compression limit.
is there a way to configure the server to have a higher compression limit
thanks,
joey
Hi,
I am experiencing a wired problem withe merge replication and SQL 2000 SP4.
We had replication working for 4 years without a problem, one of the table that we replicate has been growing in columns, now it has 55 columns.
I have noticed a problem, when I update the last column on the table and waits for the change to be updated on the subscriber the change is not there. But if I replicate the first 40 columns it works.
Changes made:
1) Upgraded to SP4
2) Added some extra fields using sp_addreplcolumn
Is this a known bug? Any ideas?
Regards
We're connecting to SQL Server 7.0 (sp2) via ODBC for our ASP application, and are having trouble saving information collected in a <textarea> tag on an HTML form. I assume the <textarea> tag contains data of type TEXT. i thought there would be no problem in converting it into a string and saving it in a VARCHAR field in the database. this works fine as long as the string is 255 characters or less. anything over that give me an "Errors Occurred" SQL Server error. the field that i'm saving this into is a VARCHAR length 8000. i thought SQL 7.0 had gotten rid of the 255 limit on varchar - could this be an ODBC driver problem (on my web server i currently have 3.50.0305) and/or should i install service pack 2 on my SQL Server? anyone advice would be much appreciated.
thanks,
matt
How to limit the length of a database field such that only first 12 characters are shown in the result?
For example, I have show the only first 12 characters of employee name.
I am being told that the colid in syscolumns may not exceed 255 if the table is replicated. Is that true? Where in BOL or elsewhere can I read-up on this? This is a shocking development!!!
View 3 Replies View RelatedI have a SSIS package that opens an xml file, puts the contents into a string, then runs a stored procedure that dumps it into an xml column in a table. One of the xml files is huge. Putting the data into a ssis string causes an error. The length of the string variable is 58,231,886. The file will only get bigger.
How else can I get this data into a SQL Server XML field.
Hi guys,
I need to get a column with the sum of the field "SUF" from table "JurnalTransMoves_1" when that field ("SUF") is ordered by the field "REFERENCE" from table "Stock", and Show the value only once.
The desired result should by something like:
Stock.REFERENCE
JurnalTransMoves.SUF
SUM(JurnalTransMoves.SUF) Group By Stock.REFERENCE
5752
10
60
5752
20
5752
30
5753
400
3000
5753
500
5753
600
5753
700
5753
800
5754
7
15
5754
8
Is there any chance to do that?
Thanks in advance,
Aldo.
Code Snippet
SELECT
Accounts.FULLNAME AS 'ACCOUNTS.FULLNAME',
Accounts.ACCOUNTKEY AS 'ACCOUNTS.ACCOUNTKEY',
Accounts.FILTER AS 'ACCOUNTS.FILTER',
Accounts.SORTGROUP AS 'ACCOUNTS.SORTGROUP',
AccSortNames.SORTCODENAME AS 'AccSortNames.SORTCODENAME',
Accounts.CreditTermsCode AS 'Accounts.CreditTermsCode',
CreditTerms.DETAILS AS 'CreditTerms.DETAILS'
CreditTerms.CURRENF AS 'CreditTerms.CURRENF'
CreditTerms.MONTH AS 'CreditTerms.MONTH',
CreditTerms.DAYS AS 'CreditTerms.DAYS',
CreditTerms.SHAREPRC AS 'CreditTerms.SHAREPRC',
CreditTerms.TEMF AS 'CreditTerms.TEMF',
CASE
WHEN CAST(Accounts.VatExampt AS int) = 0 THEN 'x'
WHEN CAST(Accounts.VatExampt AS int) = 1 THEN 'y'
ELSE 'Undefined' END AS 'VAT',
Stock.DOCUMENTID AS 'Stock.DOCUMENTID',
DocumentsDef.DOCNAME As 'DocumentsDef.DOCNAME',
CASE
WHEN CAST(Stock.DOCUMENTID as int) = 1 THEN Stock.DOCNUMBER
WHEN CAST(Stock.DOCUMENTID as int) = 3 THEN Stock.DOCNUMBER
WHEN CAST(Stock.DOCUMENTID as int) = 35 THEN Stock.DOCNUMBER
WHEN CAST(Stock.DOCUMENTID as int) = 120 THEN Stock.DOCNUMBER
WHEN CAST(Stock.DOCUMENTID as int) = 31 THEN Stock.REFERENCE
WHEN CAST(Stock.DOCUMENTID as int) = 44 THEN Stock.REFERENCE
WHEN CAST(Stock.DOCUMENTID as int) = 34 THEN Stock.REFERENCE
WHEN CAST(Stock.DOCUMENTID as int) = 43 THEN Stock.REFERENCE
WHEN CAST(Stock.DOCUMENTID as int) = 40 THEN Stock.REFERENCE
ELSE '' END AS 'Invoice No',
Stock.VALUEDATE AS 'Stock.VALUEDATE',
JurnalTrans.DESCRIPTION AS 'JurnalTrans.DESCRIPTION',
JurnalTrans.REF2 AS 'JurnalTrans.REF2',
JurnalTransMoves.SUF AS 'JurnalTransMoves.SUF',
JurnalTransMoves_1.SUF AS 'JurnalTransMoves_1.SUF',
JurnalTransMoves.TRANSID AS 'JURNALTRANSMOVES.TRANSID'
FROM
JURNALTRANSMOVES AS JurnalTransMoves_1
INNER JOIN JURNALTRANSMOVES AS JurnalTransMoves
INNER JOIN (SELECT DISTINCT JURNALTRANSID, RECEIPTSTOCKID, FULLMATCH, TABLFNUM, CKCODE, RSORT, RUSEFID FROM RECEIPTJURNALMATCH) AS ReceiptJurnalMatch_1 ON ReceiptJurnalMatch_1.JURNALTRANSID = JurnalTransMoves.ID
INNER JOIN ACCOUNTS AS Accounts ON JurnalTransMoves.ACCOUNTKEY = Accounts.ACCOUNTKEY
INNER JOIN JURNALTRANS AS JurnalTrans ON JurnalTransMoves.TRANSID = JurnalTrans.TRANSID
INNER JOIN STOCK AS Stock ON JurnalTrans.STOCKID = Stock.ID ON JurnalTransMoves_1.TRANSID = JurnalTrans.TRANSID AND JurnalTransMoves_1.ACCOUNTKEY = Accounts.ACCOUNTKEY
LEFT OUTER JOIN ITEMS AS Items
INNER JOIN STOCKMOVES ON Items.ITEMKEY = STOCKMOVES.ITEMKEY
INNER JOIN ITEMSORTNAMES AS ItemSortNames ON Items.SORTGROUP = ItemSortNames.ITEMSORTCODE ON Stock.ID = STOCKMOVES.STOCKID
LEFT OUTER JOIN ACCSORTNAMES AS AccSortNames ON Accounts.SORTGROUP = AccSortNames.ACCSORTCODE
LEFT OUTER JOIN CREDITTERMS AS CreditTerms ON Accounts.CREDITTERMSCODE = CreditTerms.CREDITTERMSCODE
LEFT OUTER JOIN DOCUMENTSDEF AS DocumentsDef ON Stock.DOCUMENTID = DocumentsDef.DOCUMENTID
WHERE
Accounts.SORTGROUP Between '3001' And '3020'
AND Accounts.ACCOUNTKEY IN ('123456')
ORDER BY Accounts.ACCOUNTKEY
Hi,
I have source table , fact table and four dim. tables , I have to update a field in fact table from source table.
How can I do it?
thanks...
Is there a way to limit a tables size in a database?
Davids Learning
I have a fairly complex set of statistical views and when I try to combine them together into one "master" view, I get the following error:
Msg 4408, Level 19, State 1
The query and the views in it exceed the limit of 16 tables.
I have not been able to find anything in books online or the kb addressing this issue. Is there a way to increase this limit? The first question I had of myself is, "Is there a way to make the view and underlying views more efficient?" But I have been coding sql for years now and I do not think there is much of a way to reduce the number of tables. It is just a darn complex query!
Any help beyond "simplify your sql statement" would be of great help.
Thanks,
Ed Keen
There may/may not be an upper limit for the number of rows in a table, but is there any performance-related limit?
I'm designing a database that stores results that have been acquired from a number of devices. Each device provides a set of data measurements every 10 minutes. Therefore each year a device will produce 52000 sets of results.
If I design a table to store a row for each set of measurements from a device (PK is based on the timestamp and the deviceID), and if there are 100 devices recording for 5 years, there will be 52000x100x5 rows. Would I get a performance increase by separating this data into one table per year? Perhaps the year could be appended to the table name to identify the particular tables.
A secondary issue is some devices can also be configured to produce a different set of measurements every 10 seconds. In this case there will be hundreds of millions of rows over a 5 year period. Therefore I am considering bulking the results into an array for a 10 minute period, and storing this array as a blob each 10 minutes. Is this going to be faster or slower than having hundreds of millions of rows?
Thanks in advance for any advice,
Mark.
I have a partitioned view sitting over several tables and I'm slowlyapproaching the 256 number. Can anybody confirm if there is such alimit for the maximum number of tables that a partitioned view canhold?If this is true, does anybody have any suggestions or ideas to workaround this max limit?TIA!
View 4 Replies View Relatedhi all,I checked out in google groups but was not able to findthe answer...is it possible to limit size table in sql server?how can I do it?TIA
View 2 Replies View Relatedwhy is this the case when importing to sql server 2005?
View 3 Replies View RelatedI thought I understand the notion in the Title until I ran the query below. This query inserts a 5000 byte value into two columns in the same record and sql (2008) doesn't complain.
-- drop table table_1
create table table_1(
[mychar1] [varchar](8000) NULL,
[mychar2] [varchar](8000) NULL
)
insert into table_1 ( mychar1, mychar2)
values (replicate('a', 5000) , replicate('b', 5000))
select * from table_1
-- truncate table table_1
I just noticed that using Replicate ('a', 50000) doesn't cause an issue either. I'll be reviewing the replicate documentation too.
I came across this statement from ASP.NET forum : "..There is a limit to the level for OUTER JOIN ANSI SQL limit is four after that you may get strange results. ..." . I did a little research but without getting clear answer from the SQL92 standard itself. I am wondering whether I can get help about this in SQL Server 2005 implementation here.
I put this question in another way, How many tables can we use in OUTER JOIN(or INNER JOIN) in SQL Server 2005?
Thanks.
Is there a limit of how many rows a table can have in SQL compact Edition? I didn't find anything in the documentation, but I get regularly a funny error message "Expression evaluation caused an overflow. [ Name of function (if known) = ]" when I try to create record number 32768 (is equal to 2 to the power of 15).
Where is this limit documented ?
Code Snippet
const string connectionString = "Data Source='" + dbFileName + "'; Max Database Size = 4091; temp file max size = 4091";
using (SqlCeEngine testEngine = new SqlCeEngine(connectionString)) {
testEngine.CreateDatabase();
}
using (SqlCeCommand addMValuesTableComand = testDbConnection.CreateCommand()) {
addMValuesTableComand.CommandText = "CREATE TABLE MValues (MSerieId int, TimeStamp smallint, Value real, PRIMARY KEY(MSerieId, TimeStamp))";
addMValuesTableComand.ExecuteNonQuery();
}
//fill table
StatusLabel.Text = "fill MValues Table";
using (SqlCeCommand fillTableComand = testDbConnection.CreateCommand()) {
int i = 0;
try {
int iterationCount = (int)RecordsCountNumericUpDown.Value;
ProgressBar.Value = 0;
ProgressBar.Maximum = iterationCount;
for (i = 0;i < iterationCount;i++) {
fillTableComand.CommandText = "INSERT MValues VALUES (1, " + i.ToString() + ", " + (i/100.0).ToString() + ")";
fillTableComand.ExecuteNonQuery();
ProgressBar.Value = i+1;
}
} catch (Exception ex) {
ErrorTextBox.Text = "Error occured" + Environment.NewLine +
"Iterations: " + i.ToString() + Environment.NewLine +
"Error Message: " + ex.ToString();
}
}
What is the maximum character limit for table check constraint . For example
ADD CONSTRAINT [xyz]
CHECK (<how many characters are allowed??>)
HI everybody need help on this..
I have two tables below
table1
country countryid
africa ___
usa ___
italy ___
Spain ___
table2
countryid country name
1 africa
2 germany
3 italy
4 usa
I need to write the countryid of table 2 to the field countryid in table1 using the criteria of the correspoinding country name table 2 to country of table 1 if it write countryid else 0..
THE RESULT WOULD BE
country countryid
africa 1
usa 4
italy 3
spain 0
thanks
Hi,
I have one table (PermProportionalCosting) that contains employeecode, costcentre and proportionpercentage. An employee may have two or more records in this table, indicating that their salary has been split across multiple costcentres.
Another table (Employee) contains a default costcentre for each employee.
Another table (TransActualHistoricalMaster) contains the hours paid to each employee for each pay period.
My query so far selects all employees and the total hours worked from the TransMaster table, and then selects the costcentre and proportionpercentage from the PermProportionalCosting table. Multiple lines are created for all employees in the PermProportionalCosting table, with each line indicating the proportionpercentage and associated costcentre.
This is my query so far:
SELECT TransActualHistoricalMaster.EmployeeCode, Employee.PreferredName, Employee.LastName, CostCentre.Description, PermanentProportionalCosting.CostCentreCode,PermanentProportionalCosting.PercentageSplit,
TransActualHistoricalMaster.OrdHours
FROM TransActualHistoricalMaster
INNER JOIN Employee ON TransActualHistoricalMaster.EmployeeCode = Employee.EmployeeCode
INNER JOIN CostCentre ON Employee.CostCentreCode = CostCentre.CostCentreCode
FULL OUTER JOIN PermanentProportionalCosting ON TransActualHistoricalMaster.EmployeeCode = PermanentProportionalCosting.EmployeeCode
GROUP BY TransActualHistoricalMaster.EmployeeCode, Employee.PreferredName, Employee.LastName, CostCentre.Description, PermanentProportionalCosting.CostCentreCode, PermanentProportionalCosting.PercentageSplit, TransActualHistoricalMaster.OrdHours
This next bit is what I am unsure of.
I would like the CostCentre field from the Employee table to go into the PermanentProportionalCosting.CostCentreCode column where the employee doesn't have a record in the PermanentProportionalCosting table. In the above query, there is a null value for each employee that doesn't have a record in the PermanentProportionalCosting table, so I would like my query to replace the null value with the costcentre from the Employee table.
Any assistance would really be appreciated.
Thanks.
Is there a performance limit on the number of indexes per table / database ? With Filtered indexes there appear to be many more opportunities for more finely defined, and therefore smaller indexes resulting in many more indexes on a single table.
View 4 Replies View RelatedI need create a field to store tax rate. I need only 2 decimal points. I defined the field as decimal, precision=5 and scale=2. Does it mean that it can hold value from 0.00 to 999.99?
View 12 Replies View RelatedHi All,
A general question for you.
Does QSL replication work on a row by row basis or field by field.
e.g.
One user updates a field in row a on his table
a different user updates a different field on the same row (row a) on his table 10 secs later.
Does the first user's chnage get overwritten or will both chnages be kept?
Which model would I need for this?
Thanks
Hi,
In my production box is running on SQL7.0 with Merge replication and i want add one more table and i want add one more column existing replication table. Any body guide me how to add .This is very urgent
Regards
Don
1. Can someone tell me how to replicate the identity field.
2. When I use the 'NOT FOR REPLICATION' option, I keeps getting synx error. Here is the command:
alter table tusers alter column {userid INT} IDENTITY (1, 1) [NOT FOR REPLICATION]. Do you know why?
3. When I use the transaction replication wizard, why some of the table do not allow me to replicate(There is a key and cross symbol on the articles selection)?
Thanks
I have a table that has a TEXT field and I want to replicate it. It already has a primary key field in it. I read that in SQL Server 6.5, you can do transactional replication on a table that has a TEXT field in it. I'm wondering if I need to do any other special configuration to replicate this table, i.e. enable the truncate on checkpoint option or anything else? Thanks, Hoang
View 1 Replies View RelatedHi,
I have a concern about adding a new field to a table with image field - which is huge.
Will there be a problem with some databases, where they have a hard time locating data correctly after such a large field?
Previously this happened to me, and what was advised to put all the big fields at the end of the table.
Thanks.
does anyone know if there is a way, or perhaps a custom toolbox control that is already developed that allows you to drag an entire dataset into a table, instead of pulling everything in field by field...?
was just curious.
-dk
I am trying to replicate tables in a sql server 6.5 which contain the timestamp field. An error occurs and it shuts the replication task off and it says it cannot update the timestamp field. If I choose vertical partitioning and do not replicate the timestamp field then an error occurs that insert value list does not match column list. Is it the case that the subscriber cannot have this field in the table?
Besides deleting the timestamp field from the table completely, is there another solution or am I forgetting to set something?