hi all,
I have a field which name is Information
and it type is Varchar (8000),but some time data access than 8000 character, my client told me,make this field to store Unlimited data.
So how can i achive this task, i m using VS 2003 (ASP.NET with VB.NET) with SQL 2000.
Thanks
Shally
How to implement distinct storage tiers on SQL Remote BLOB Storage (RBS)?
I want to use this SQL Feature to move files(images, videos, pdf files) from a database to a distinct database dedicated to RBS. Then I want to have several storage tiers, where objects will be saved and moved according access frequency. Old data will be arquived in cheap storage, but it must be always accessible if needed.
Description:
- 1st and main tier: new and frequently accessed objects stored in high performance storage;
- 2nd tier: automatically move older or less accessed objects to an inexpensive and different storage tier;
- in all cases, all objects must be accessible to all users, but accessing to archived objects(2nd tier) will be much slower;
All,
I'm having an issue with the Flat File Data Flow Source returning only a limited set of the rows that are in the flat file. Basically, I connect to the flat file fine, it goes to retrieve the data (tab delimited file) and only returns 190 of 392 rows. Is there a limitation on the # of rows this data flow source can retrieve or something? I've look all through the settings and properties of the task as well as the connection manager and nothing is obvious as to what is causing this. Hopefully someone ou tthere has run into this before and can help me retrieve all rows. Thanks in advance!
bakerz
Hi,
i want to know how many data can storage into sql server compact edition. I've got a db into a pocket pc that has a table with about 2000 records inside; are they too records?
Hi All,As per BOL, XML data type can store up 2 GB of data.My question is when a row is inserted in a table, for its xml column,2GB of space will be resered.In other words, how xml is internally stored. Is storage allocation issimilar to varchar(max) data type?Thanks in advance for everything.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI am planning on doing database mirroring using two (2) servers for each instance and a SAN to store the data and log files for both the primary server and mirrored server. How do I arrange the SAN 4 Physical Drives?
My options are:
· 2 Raid 1 Mirrors giving 250 GB to each SQL engine This though has both the transaction logs and data on the same physical drive even if we split it up further into logical drives
· A Raid 10 - The transaction logs and data can be on separate drives
· A Raid 5 using the 4 Drives. (How SQL will see these drives Im not sure when its 2 SQL engines)
· Or I could get a 5th drive and have a mirror set for transaction logs and a RAID 5 configured for the data.
Hello, So, here's my dumb question; if I wanted to store some *.gif images in some database (SQL2K possibly 2K5) field and wanted to pull the information from that to display on the web form, am I actually storing the image in the database or am I storing the location of the image in the database?I ask this because I was under the impression that the location to the image file is what was being stored but another person was saying that it was the actual image. I guess I'm confused... Thanks in advance....
View 4 Replies View Relatedre: [Windows 2000 SP1, SQL Server 7.0 SP2]
I am developing an online web-based address book for multiple users. There are STANDARD FIELDS and CUSTOM FIELDS.
Standard fields include: Name,Street,City,State,Zip.
Custom fields are those defined by a specific user. For example:
User-A Custom fields:
Interest Rate <real>
Loan Amount <currency>
Start date <date>
User-B Custom fields:
Blood type <char 3>
Date of birth <date>
Referred by <varchar 50>
Different users can have different custom fields in their address book. As you can see, while the standard fields for each user can be
stored in a single table. However, I have several methods by which I can store the CUSTOM fields.
------------------------------------------------
Method 1: Create 2 separate tables called CustomField and CustomValue:
CustomField has fields:
FieldID <int>
FieldName <varchar 25>
UserID <int>
CustomValue has fields:
ValueID <int>
Value <varchar 50>
FieldID <int>
------------------------------------------------
Method 2: Create a separate Field and multiple Value tables for each data type:
CustomField, CustomCharValue, CustomIntValue, CustomMoneyValue, etc...
CustomField has fields:
FieldID <int>
FieldName <varchar 25>
FieldType <smallint> (determines which TABLE, below, contains the data)
UserID <int>
CustomCharValue
CharValueID <int>
IntValue <Varchar 50>
FieldID <int>
CustomIntValue
IntValueID <int>
IntValue <int>
FieldID <int>
etc....etc...
The structures of those tables would be similar to Method 1, but the data would be segregated based on their data type.
--------------------------------------------------
I'm thinking that while Method 1 will be easier to implement, Method 2 may offer me better performance if coded correctly. I'm going
to assume that I'll have at least 1-5 million records to work with over the course of my first year and I will need the ability to sort
records based on values in the custom fields as well.
My first question is: Which method should I be considering and is there an alternative or hybrid that I should be considering?
My second question is: What statements should I use in my stored procedure that will enable me to retrieve a list of USERID, CustomFieldIDs and their values as one resulting table that I can query at will and with solid performance?
Gregory
email: sqlGuy@clubtel.com
1> How is the data stored physically when there is now primary key as well as any index defined in the table......?
2> How is the data stored physically when there is just a primary key defined in one of the column of the table? No INDEX defined.
Thanks,
Rahul Jha
I trying to fully understand when to use different data types in sql server.I want to know what Microdoft means when they say"Varchar is the actual length of the data entered plus 2 bytes".example e.g. what would the storage of varchar (50) be?
View 7 Replies View RelatedHello there,
Don't know if this is the right forum to be asking this, but I'll give it a try...
I'm relativelly a beginner in SQL Server and T-SQL in general. The problem I'm trying to solve is the following:
The big picture is that I have data coming from different data sources which I need to store on a database for later reference. Each data source might have a different set of measurements. For example, data source 1 might log Pressure and Humidity while data source 2 logs Pressure and Temperature. Once the data is present on the DB, the users can go ahead and retrieve data for a given [datasource/measurement/time interval] to generate reports or charts.
My implementation so far consists of two tables: series_info and series_data. series_info holds general information for a given series of measurements for a given data source (Pressure for data source 1, Pressure for data source 2, Humidity for data source 1 and Temperature for data source 2, in our example). Each series has a bigint index as primary key.
The table series_data contains all data relative to the series from series_info. Each piece of data has a bigint as a primary key, an associate time (which is always crescent) and a foreign key to the series it represents (in series_info).
Alright, everything is cool so far. However, whenever a user wants to retrieve data for given [data source/measurement/time interval], this takes very long, since all data is interposed in series_data and for every search it's necessary to find where the desired data actually lies.
One obvious solution for this would be to dynamically create a new table to hold the data for each series, but that would just make my database disorganized, since there would be thousands and thousands of tables.
Another thing that comes to my mind is to create a table with information of where lies the data for a given [data source / measurement] for given dates. So when the user requested data for a given [data source/measurement] between, say, january and february, we would first look at this intermediate table and find out that the data lies between indexes 1000 and 2000 on the series_data table, so the next SELECT command to series_data would already contain a restriction like WHERE index>=1000 and index<=2000. This should probably improve the speed of retrieval.
What do you guys (or girls) think? Maybe there's simply a classical solution for such a case.
Thanks in advance!
Hello,
I am designing a program for work with SQL Server express 2005. But I don't know what is the data storage limit in this version of SQL Server.
What i want is storing about 30000 records in a table of the database.
Hasn't SQL Server express 2005 any problem or restrictions for storing the data?
Please advice in this regards,
Thank you,
Mona
Dear Friends,
I am using SQL server 7 with ASP. I have two working environment means one is korean and second it english.
- one Korean OS server have SQL server 7.0 and it is my database server
- second Korean OS server is only webserver
- English OS is win2k and it is only Web server.
1) When i used both Korean server as my webserver + database server then there is no problem to add Korean Data to SQL server On korean OS.
2) But when I try to user English OS server as my webserver and Korean Os server as my database server then I am not able to store Korean Data in Database server insted of it stored some mis/junk/acssi characters in database.
-- I allready try with Korean version of MDAC of English os
-- I also try with OEM feature in SQL server client network utility
-- When I am use CODEPAGE in my .ASP page then data storage work fine .. but at the time of getting it back there is problem.
If u need any more information about problem then let me know.
So please help me in this regards.
Thanx in advance
Anis Vora
Partner
Global SoftWeb Solutions
www.globalsoftweb.com
I am developing an online web-based address book for multiple users. There are STANDARD FIELDS and CUSTOM FIELDS.
Standard fields include: Name,Street,City,State,Zip.
Custom fields are those defined by a specific user. For example:
User-A Custom fields:
Interest Rate <real>
Loan Amount <currency>
Start date <date>
User-B Custom fields:
Blood type <char 3>
Date of birth <date>
Referred by <varchar 50>
Different users can have different custom fields in their address book. As you can see, while the standard fields for each user can be
stored in a single table. However, I have several methods by which I can store the CUSTOM fields.
------------------------------------------------
Method 1: Create 2 separate tables called CustomField and CustomValue:
CustomField has fields:
FieldID <int>
FieldName <varchar 25>
UserID <int>
CustomValue has fields:
ValueID <int>
Value <varchar 50>
FieldID <int>
------------------------------------------------
Method 2: Create a separate Field and multiple Value tables for each data type:
CustomField, CustomCharValue, CustomIntValue, CustomMoneyValue, etc...
CustomField has fields:
FieldID <int>
FieldName <varchar 25>
FieldType <smallint> (determines which TABLE, below, contains the data)
UserID <int>
CustomCharValue
CharValueID <int>
IntValue <Varchar 50>
FieldID <int>
CustomIntValue
IntValueID <int>
IntValue <int>
FieldID <int>
etc....etc...
The structures of those tables would be similar to Method 1, but the data would be segregated based on their data type.
--------------------------------------------------
I'm thinking that while Method 1 will be easier to implement, Method 2 may offer me better performance if coded correctly. I'm going
to assume that I'll have at least 1-5 million records to work with over the course of my first year and I will need the ability to sort
records based on values in the custom fields as well.
My first question is: Which method should I be considering and is there an alternative or hybrid that I should be considering?
My second question is: What statements should I use in my stored procedure that will enable me to
retrieve a list of USERID, CustomFieldIDs and their values as one resulting table that I can query at will and with solid performance?
Gregory
email: sqlGuy@clubtel.com
I am a Windows developer for the IBM Tivoli Storage Manager Server (TSMS) product.
Our product installation is built with InstallShield and uses the Windows Installer.
On a new installation of Windows 2003 x64 Storage Server R2, at a customer's site, the TSMS product fails to install.
The install of the OS has version 3.01.400.3959 of the Windows Installer and I see no newer version that installs.
Part of our product is 32 bit (console) and another part is x64 (server).
When installing I can see that the install's default is being redirected/reset to C:Program Files (x86)TivoliTSM after it is explicitly set by a custom action to ..Program Files.. . I further observe that our custom actions to write 64 bit registry entries are being refused.
REGSAM samMask = KEY_ALL_ACCESS;
if ( regIsWow64Process () ) samMask = samMask | KEY_WOW64_64KEY;
lStatus = RegCreateKeyEx( hLocalConnectKeyRoot,
szSubkey,
0L,
NULL,
REG_OPTION_NON_VOLATILE,
samMask,
NULL,
hKey,
&dw ) ;
The above fails to create the key.
We have tried four versions of our TSMS spanning many changes but the install acts the same.
This does not happen on any other Windows OS we test on but we do not test on Windows 2003 Storage Server R2 being that it is an OEM product. We did test on Windows server 2003 R2 x64 and do not see this problem.
Do you have any suggestions on how to tackle this problem?
I have full installation traces but can only see that the registry work is being refused. I can't see why.
Ok so facebook groups have 100,000's of members. Members can be part of an unlimited number of groups, and a group can have an unlimited number of members.
Comma Deliniated String seems absurd. Many-2-Many Database relationship seems like it won't scale well t the 10's of thousands and 100's of thousands of members (especially if you have 1000-5000 groups). A table for each group would work but thats a bit over the top in my opinion. XML file doesn't seem to be any better than the above options.
I am no database guru, but I can't figure out a scalable method of doing this, be it with or without a database. I need something that can support 10 groups that have 20 members each OR 1000 groups with 100,000 members each.
Any help, suggestions, or kicked in the right direction would be most appreciated.
I need to generate a report of DTS package results, i. e. succeed, fail, error, etc. What tables is information of this type stored for SQL 2000?
winniemax
I am using sql server 2008 r2 on my end. I have created a database named testDB. I have a lot of tables with some log tables in this. some tables have contain lack of records in log table.
So my purpose is that I want to fix the table size of those tables(log tables) and want to move records in other database table placed on another location. So my database has no problem.
is there any way to make such above steps which I want for my database?
Is there already built any such functionality in sql server?
I have a search query on my page. However, since the resultset may be very large, I want to retreive only those results that are currently shown on the gridview page.Often a user won't browse through more than a couple of pages, so it's b-*** to send all the records to the client.I know that with a sp you can define that you want to retrieve the first or second x records, but I want to do this with SQL...is that possible?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI'd like to create a limited user on SQL Server 2005 to minimize any possible problems with my ASP.NET 2.0 website. My question is how limited can I make that user? What exactly does it need to be able to do?
(In case it makes a difference, my site utilizes membership, profiles, and roles, as well as some custom tables and stored procedures that I created.)
Thanks in advance for any advice! :-)
Dear all,
When I try to add the columns to 300,
But still can not over 300 column.
What's limited columns that MS SQL 7.0?
Thank you very much..
Gemmy.
Hiya - this might be a bit of a simple question but please bear with me! I have looked reasonably hard for this but can not find an answer:
I have an MSSQL 2000 server running on PC-A and would like to limit certain users (e.g. admin) to be only able to logon when using the actual PC-A machine.
I am aware that you can acheive this in MySQL with the "insert into user (host, user, password) values (localhost, username, password);" command. Is there an equivalent way to do this in MSSQL?
Thanks for your help,
Alistair.
Hi All,
How can I give the user view rights only?
Hi,
I couldn't make a clear title without writing 2 lines.
My problem (I tried to find out through the archives):
this scenario will be used for several DBs on severals servers.
The remotes servers are not mine, I have only access to the backups files, I have no rights to setup a replication relationship.
I'm using a repository server with SQL 2005, and daily, I need to get the latest Full backup from an SQL2000 server, copy it to the repository server, restore it then delete the .bak file.
This is possible by using many different scripts (like .vbs to copy and rename the latest Full backups) then I use SQL job for daily restore.
Process is too long and the time estimated to start next task (and the backup keep growing).
Is there a way to do everything via SQL2005 script (job)?
Initially, the problem is that I have to do this with the Full backups every days (around 5 Dbs 8 Go in average). So if I can use the latest transaction log files (that would eliminate my first question).
The best way is to use log shipping as well but sql2005 is needed on both sides.
Hope I'm clear.
Thanks for any help!
I created a login in SQL Server 2005 for SQL Server Reporting Service training purpose. It seemed the login exceed the connection limit. There were 9 people in the training and some people got the connection errors. Sometimes the connection error went away after the user re-established the connection. Is there a default limit per login? If so, what is the default? Can I change it to unlimited? And how?
Thanks.
DanYeung
I want to use TRIGGER_NESTLEVEL to test if a specific trigger is on the execution stack.
Normally, the table with the trigger is accessed by stored procedures and the user does not have any direct access to the table.
I am having problems doing this because I need to use OBJECT_ID to get the ID to pass to TRIGGER_NESTLEVEL. OBJECT_ID is unable to see the table when the stored procedure is run as that limited user account.
How can I use TRIGGER_NESTLEVEL in this scenario without granting this user permissions on the table?
Here is complete code to reproduce. The output is:
Nest level is: 1 (running as admin)
Nest level is: (null) (running as limited user)
The output that I want would have a 1 instead of (null). Hard coding the specific OBJECT_ID is not the solution that I am looking for, since I want to use identical database scripts on separate installs of my database.
Code Block
IF OBJECT_ID(N'Hello') IS NOT NULL DROP TABLE Hello
IF DATABASE_PRINCIPAL_ID(N'TestUser') IS NOT NULL DROP USER TestUser
IF OBJECT_ID(N'HelloProcedure') IS NOT NULL DROP PROCEDURE HelloProcedure
GO
CREATE TABLE Hello
(
ID INT PRIMARY KEY IDENTITY,
Data INT NULL
)
GO
CREATE TRIGGER HelloTrigger1
ON Hello
FOR INSERT
AS
SET NOCOUNT ON
UPDATE Hello SET Data = 1234 WHERE ID IN (SELECT ID FROM inserted)
GO
CREATE TRIGGER HelloTrigger2
ON Hello
FOR UPDATE
AS
SET NOCOUNT ON
PRINT N'Nest level is: ' + ISNULL(CAST(TRIGGER_NESTLEVEL(OBJECT_ID(N'HelloTrigger1')) AS NVARCHAR(128)), N'(null)')
GO
CREATE PROCEDURE HelloProcedure
AS
SET NOCOUNT ON
INSERT INTO Hello VALUES (0)
GO
CREATE USER TestUser WITHOUT LOGIN
GO
GRANT EXECUTE ON HelloProcedure TO TestUser
GO
EXEC (N'HelloProcedure') -- Prints: Nest level is: 1
GO
EXEC (N'HelloProcedure') AS USER = N'TestUser' -- Prints: Nest level is: (null)
GO
I created a login in SQL Server 2005 for SQL Server Reporting Service training purpose. It seemed the login exceed the connection limit. There were 9 people in the training and some people got the connection errors. Sometimes the connection error went away after the user re-established the connection. Is there a default limit per login? If so, what is the default? Can I change it to unlimited? And how?
Thanks.
DanYeung
I got a report that seems to be limiting its displayed data to the first 8 records but not in the SQL statement itself. Although I have been working with SQL for many years I'm very new to Reporting Services so it may be something very simple, like perhaps a property that can be changed on the report for me to increase the amount of records the report is pulling from the database?
I don't seem to find any property set to 8 though.
Also the report is not pulling the records in the order the query pulls them, but in an apparent random order, I don't need to change this but it may help describe the report a bit better.
Hi all;
qrymillcgetbytype_app ( stored query in MS-Access) in my code :
MS-ACCESS Part:
query defination
PARAMETERS prmMillToolType Long;
SELECT MILLC.ID, MILLC.InsMillBdyID AS [Tool ID], MILLC.SubType, MILLC.Radius AS [End Radius], MILLC.CuttingDia AS [Tool Dia], MILLC.EffAxlCutLen AS [Effec Cut Length], MILLC.OverallLen AS [Overall Length], MILLC.HandOfCut AS [Hand Of Cut], MILLC.NoOfFlutes AS [No Of Flutes], MILLC.TmcID AS [Tool Class], MILLC.Comment, MILLC.Protrusion, MILLC.ShankDia, millC.ShoulderLen AS [Shoulder Length]
FROM MILLC
WHERE (((MILLC.[Mill Tool Type])=[prmMillToolType]) AND ((MILLC.[ON])=True))
ORDER BY MILLC.ID;
C++ PART
bstrSQL contain stored query name "qrymillcgetbytype_app"
hr = piRecordSet->put_Source(bstrSQL);
piRecordSet->Open(vNull, vNull, adOpenKeyset, adLockOptimistic, adCmdUnknown)
it opens fine
but when bstrSQL contain this query name " qrymillcgetbytype_app WHERE ID > -1 AND [Tool Dia] >= 0.000000 AND [Tool Dia] <= 5.000000 "
it displays the same output. Where clause won't work?
Pls help me out.
Im using the Xquery:SELECT @xmlDoc.query('
for $item in (/Collection/Content)
where $item/Html/root/DocInfo/Webinar = "White Paper"
order by $item[1]/Html[1]/root[1]/DocInfo[1]/Title[1] ascending
return $item
');
I only want to return the TOP 5 nodes (not the entire nodelist). What is the FLOWR expression or simplest way to return the limited nodeset?
Thanks
I am using ORDER BY NEWID() to return random record from sql database. how do i go about returning only 5 random records instead of all records.
Thanks.
Hi, I am trying to create a SQL Server user which would only have write permissions. This account would not be able to read, drop, alter, delete etc. It would simply be used to write data.
Is there a way to configure a user like this without scripting the permissions for each table. The DB has some dynamically generated tables, so the users privillges would ideally extend to those newly added tables without having to rerun some kind of script. Is this possible?
Hi, I am trying to create a SQL Server user which would only have write permissions. This account would not be able to read, drop, alter, delete etc. It would simply be used to write data.
Is there a way to configure a user like this without scripting the permissions for each table. The DB has some dynamically generated tables, so the users privillges would ideally extend to those newly added tables without having to rerun some kind of script. Is this possible?