The problem with this is that after every rename, permission to the TableB is lost so we have to execute a statement to grant permission back to TableB after the process is complete.
My question is why is this necessary? Is the permission tied to the table in such a way that it can't use the name only?
We had 3 Availability Groups set up in SQL 2012 last year but they were poorly named so I am just looking to rename them but there doesn't seem to be any command for it that I can find.Can they not be renamed once created? I guess I could just create new ones and move the DB's into them but just thought I would check!
If I run an ALTER DATABASE command that renames the Logical file name of a database, will I run into any unseen consequences in terms of day to day use of the database?
hi, I had a table and it has certain dependecies(like stored proc.). I rename the table and created anew one with same name.this new table did not inherited all the dependecies which it should. To say, I had a table TAB.I renamed it to TAB_old and made a new table with name TAB.When I go to SEM and click on 'Display Dependencies' table TAB is not showing anything whereas TAB_old is stil showing all the dependecies.I even ran Update stats and sp_updatestats. any idea what is this going on..... TIA
Using SQL Server 2k5 sp1, Is there a way to deny users access to a specific column in a table and deny that same column to all stored procedures and views that use that column? I have a password field in a database in which I do not want anyone to have select permissions on (except one user). I denied access in the table itself, however the views still allow for the user to select that password. I know I can go through and set this on a view by view basis, but I am looking for something a little more global.
I renamed a table, and now whenever I try to insert data into the table I get this error:
Invalid object name 'dbo.OldTableName'.
For the life of me I can't find anything that uses the old name. There is a trigger and a couple indexes, but as far as I can see they all use the new name?
My current project requires me to both rename the MDB file for an Access database and rename the table it contains. The Access files comes in with random names, each containing one table with a specific name. Based on the table name it contains, I rename both the file and the interior table to a standard name which a later package in the process references.
A foreach container loops through all the mdb files in the applicable directory, containing a script task and a file system task. The script task uses GetOleDbSchemaTable to extract the table name, then loops through an array of table names from the client's configuration, comparing it to a similar array of constant names and getting the matching one. The file system task then uses that found name (or the original table name if a conversion is not found) to rename the file to match that standard name. So far, so good.
Now I have to rename the table within the file as well. All of the examples of code I'm finding on the 'net refernce ADOX, but I haven't been able to figure out how to use that in a script task, assuming that's what I want to do in the first place.
Anyone have any experience with doing things like this?
I got a table which gets populated by stor proc where we pivot the Sum(Balance of mortgage) by YYYYMM for the whole duration of the loan term.
I have a requirement to rename the column header where the previous month end balance period be renamed to P0.
if we run the report today, then the balance as at 31/09 should show under column P0 which now shows under 201509 and then P0 keeps shifting with each month run.
I'm working on creating a new version of an existing table. I want to keep the old table around, only with a different name. In looking this up I found there's a system routine named sp_rename, which looks like it will work fine.However in thinking about this I realized that the foreign key constraints defined on the table (there's 3 of them) are likely to not be renamed, correct?
If I'm correct, then I suppose I could rename the table, then drop the 3 foreign key constraints, and create them new using different names for those foreign key constraints.
In SSMS, I used the ALTER TABLE statement to add a field to a table. No errors are generated and I can verify that the field has been added. Since there are only about 20 records in the table, I use the Edit All Records option to populate that new field. Later, when a job runs using that new field, it fails because the field suddenly does not exist. Sure enough, I check the table and the field is gone. To be more specific, I can add and populate the new field at 2pm. At 6pm, when the job runs, the new field is apparently gone.
I have searched for answers but only have found responses related to the "Prevent saving changes that require table re-creation" in the Tools|Options settings in SSMS. I did uncheck that option, but the problem persists. Based on my searches, the only other alternative is to recreate the table with the new field and move the data from the "old" table to the "new". I got the impression that unchecking that option would mean I would not need to do all this.
I know I have done this type of change before with no issues. What may have changed?I am using SQL Server 2008R2 SP2 on Windows Server 2008R2 SP1.
I am using SQL Server 2005 and trying to create a linked server on Oracle 10. I used the commands below: EXEC sp_addlinkedserver @server = 'test1', @srvproduct = 'Oracle', @provider = 'MSDAORA', @datasrc = 'testsource' exec sp_addlinkedsrvlogin @rmtsrvname = 'test1', @useself = 'false', @rmtuser='sp', @rmtpassword='sp'
When I execute select * from test1...COUNTRY I get the error. "The OLE DB provider "MSDAORA" for linked server "...." does not contain the table "COUNTRY". The table either does not exist or the current user does not have permissions on that table." The 'sp' user I am connecting is the owner of the table. What could be the problem ? Thanks a lot.
This problem is connected with the query i posted yesterday regarding insertion of global variables. I was able to insert the variable in a table to check its value.
This value is mapped to the global variable in a previous Execute SQL Task. But when I use the same global variable to insert in a table, default value 0 is inserted.
My query is does the global variable declared at the package level does not store the value mapped across multiple tasks in control flow?
How can i insert the value stored in a variable in a table from previous SQL Task.
Can anyone suggest some solution,links to try a workaround?
I have an availability group with read only replicas, readable secondary set to yes and allow all incoming connections. I have also configured the read only routing (at least I'm pretty sure this is correct).
If I login to SSMS with a user in the sysadmin role I can view the objects in the read only replica database. If I login with a user in the public role I'm unable to get past the obvious error:
"The database databaseA is not accessbile. (ObjectExplorer)"
I've also tried adding the "ApplicationIntent=ReadOnly" option.
We have a monitor tool to monitor our SQL servers.The vendor has a script to grant permission to application account to SQL server so that they can do the monitoring.
I don't want to grant system admin role, but the script they have is very specific, the minimum is:
must be a member of db_datareader role on the msdb database must have view server state permissions view any definition connection permission to master database execute permission on the xp_readerrorlog stored procedure connect permission to the msdb database must be member of db_Datareader role in the msdb datab ase connect permission to all databases.
The script given by vendor is as follows in the attachment.I don't like the last execute statement for if a new database is created, we have to remember manually add the monitoring acccount to that database.
I know in SQL 2014 it has a new feature of connect to any database, but unfortunately we are using SQL 2012 and 2008.
script to connect to any database but no need to add that each time we creates a new database.
I am logging into a SQL instance to run the following query:
DECLARE @ReturnCode int EXECUTE @ReturnCode = [master].dbo.xp_create_subdir N'sharemasterFULL' IF @ReturnCode <> 0 RAISERROR('Error creating directory.', 16, 1)
The share in which the folder is to be created has my account added with full permissions to create files. However this command fails unless I add the SQL Service account user with rights to the folder also.
Is this expected behaviour, is this something specific to extended stored procedures?
I've got a Server setup at work on our RD domain It's Windows 2012, running SQL Server 2012 with reporting Services I've installed our application and reports to this server.
If I'm on my CORP domain on my development laptop I can enter the following into IE [URL] ...... and the SSRS reports page opens up fine
I then RDP into this server using my same CORP credentials Open IE on this server and enter the same URL within IE and get User 'CORPORATEjoep' does not have required permissions. Verify that sufficient permissions have been granted and Windows User Account Control (UAC) restrictions have been addressed.
I'm on the Server itself. Why does my account not work there, but when I access SSRS from outside this SERVER with same login, it works
1. A few months ago, I received a request to deny delete to a group (Windows AD login) against 3 databases. So I issued a DENY DELETE to the relevant Windows login.
2. Now, someone is having trouble updating data. The issue seems to be that a trigger fires during the update. In the trigger the code tries to delete from a table in the previously delete-denied databases. So the update fails.
-- In retrospect, perhaps I should have used REVOKE - not sure
-- Also, I can't seem to find a listing of the DENY permissions - or rather, how to list what permissions are denied. I guess maybe that is a hard thing to do if the result of a DENY is to leave certain permission columns NULL (vs adding 'DENY'). But it would be useful for me to see what the current permission state is.
-- Finally, I tried to undo the DENY without success. Here is my attempt.
a. I tried GRANT DELETE... - no luck b. Then I saw an article explaining to use REVOKE, so I tried 'REVOKE DELETE' followed by 'GRANT DELETE' - still no luck.
I have stored procedures. I have heard that it is a best practice to use stored procedures to encapsulate some SQL statements and then grant permissions to execute the stored procedure. But when I try this and use EXECUTE AS to test it out, the user in question gets errors about not having access to some of the underlying objects.
How does this best practice work? If I need to grant the user permissions to the underlying objects anyway, I am not sure why a stored procedure is considered best practice in this regard.
I have a sql server 2012 server and I need to prevent the users from creating new schemas by mistake. Is there any way to revoke that permission alone but still letting the user to create their own objects in dbo (yes I know that shouldn't be in dbo but that is another issue).
I have a stored procedure which executes about forty other stored procedures in several different databases. All of these other procedures truncate tables and insert new data into those tables selected from still other tables.
I want to run this top-level procedure using an account which can't do anything else.
Is there a simple way to give it all the permissions it needs without empowering it to do anything else?
I want to set permissions on two tables...i dont want to allow delete or truncate statements to be executed on those tables. how can i do it....(sqlserver 2005)
I have always set up sql security for reporting to have select permissions on the tables to be used in the reports. I'm told by my coworkers that this is not advisable and I should only use stored procedures for reporting. I use stored procedures for all application duties, insert/update/delete etc but find with reporting it's much easier to just provide select permission to the tables. The only drawback to my method appears to me to be a user could conceivably view all data in tables while with the stored procedure one can limit what is being viewed. Anything else I'm missing? Thanks.
Does anybody know of a way to allow non-administrators to execute the truncate table statement?
I have developers that from time to time need to move data between their databases usinge the DTS wizard. Most of their tables have identity columns and in order retain the identity seed, they need to click on the option to enable identity insert. This option isn't available to non administrators.
Is there a way to replicate the table permissions from publisher to subscriber? I noticed that when replication takes place, the permissions that were set up on tables on the subscriber are wiped out. I need the permissions to be send to the subscriber automatically.
I have give permission to one SQL Server 2005 user account on a table in my database. i want to script that or any permission i have on table.
my question is, how to create that script in SQL server 2005. if i right click the table -> select "script table as" and select "create to" new query editor, it only creates script for creating the table and doesnt include the permission any account have on that table.....how to do that ? plz help
I have a list of users that I want to restrict access to tables in a database. The goal is to allow the users to use select statements on the views instead of the tables. How can this be accomplished?
