I have a extremely large table and out of that I just need 2 records but based on some logic . For example
IF EMPLOYEE_ADDRESS <> NULL
set Employee_HAS_HOME to 1
ELSE
set Employee_HAS_HOME to 0
Here I can not use just first 1000 records as I am not sure If I will cover the second condition in first 1000 rows . Then I came up with solution like : -
select * from employee_table where employee_address <> NULL LIMIT 1
UNION
select * from employee_table where employee_address = NULL LIMIT 1
And this will give me 2 records which I can use for my testing . But unfortunately this is not working.
hi,i have a union statement that works like a charm:SELECT [Name], [EventID] AS [ItemID], [TourID], [Date], NULL AS [StartDate], [Date] AS [SortDate], [Type] FROM [Events] WHERE [TourID] IS NULL AND AccessLevel <= @AuthenticationLevel
UNION
SELECT [Name], [TourID] AS [ItemID], [TourID], NULL AS [Date], [StartDate], [StartDate] AS [SortDate], '2' AS [Type] FROM [Tours] WHERE AccessLevel <= @AuthenticationLevel
ORDER BY [SortDate] this statement selects all the records i want from both tables, and orders the entire new table by sort date.what i want to do is to add a limitation on the number of records. i have tried using both LIMIT and TOP commands, but i can't get it working. both of the below statements give me a syntax error saying "Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'ORDER'"first try:SELECT * FROM (<same_statement_as_above>) ORDER BY [SortDate] LIMIT 2second try:SELECT TOP 2 * FROM (<same_statement_as_above>) ORDER BY [SortDate]what am i doing wrong, and how do i achieve what i want?i am working with mssql server 2005 (express locally, and standard on my hosting service). thanks for your help!
i have the following union statement, which works like a charm:SELECT [Name], [EventID] AS [ItemID], [TourID], [Date], NULL AS [StartDate], [Date] AS [SortDate], [Type] FROM [Events] WHERE [TourID] IS NULL AND AccessLevel <= @AuthenticationLevel UNION SELECT [Name], [TourID] AS [ItemID], [TourID], NULL AS [Date], [StartDate], [StartDate] AS [SortDate], '2' AS [Type] FROM [Tours]WHERE AccessLevel <= @AuthenticationLevel ORDER BY [SortDate]
now i want to ad a limit to this statement, but i can't get it working. i have tried this:SELECT * FROM (SELECT [Name], [EventID] AS [ItemID], [TourID], [Date], NULL AS [StartDate], [Date] AS [SortDate], [Type] FROM [Events] WHERE [TourID] IS NULL AND AccessLevel <= @AuthenticationLevel UNION SELECT [Name], [TourID] AS [ItemID], [TourID], NULL AS [Date], [StartDate], [StartDate] AS [SortDate], '2' AS [Type] FROM [Tours]WHERE AccessLevel <= @AuthenticationLevel) ORDER BY [SortDate] LIMIT 2 but i keep getting an error message saying "Incorrect syntax near the keyword "ORDER". what am i doing wrong?
I have a query which does 3 selects and Union ALLs each to get a final result set. The performance is unacceptable - takes around a minute to run. If I remove the Union All so that the result sets are returned individually it returns all 3 from the query in around 6 seconds (acceptable performance).
Any way to join the result sets together without using Union All.
Each result set has exactly the same structure returned...
Query below [for reference]...
WITH cte AS ( SELECT A.[PoleID], ISNULL(B.[IsSpanClear], 0) AS [IsSpanClear], B.[SurveyDate], ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION BY A.[PoleID] ORDER BY B.[SurveyDate] DESC) rownum FROM[UT_Pole] A LEFT OUTER JOIN [UT_Surveyed_Pole] B ON A.[PoleID] = B.[PoleID]
I have a Union All transformation with 4 inputs and one output when I debug the package the sum of the different inputs rows does not match the row count in output.
I don't understand, I've used the Union All transform many times and I've never seen this.
When creating a database, SQL Server 6.5 seems to have a 2 gig limit. What I mean is that if the device chosen is over 2 gigs SQL Server displays the size of the device as anegative number. This prevents me from being able to expand the database when I need to. Can anyone tell me why this is so, and if there`s anyway around it??
we all know mysql: select * from table limit ?1, ?2
equals
sqlserver: SELECT TOP ?2 * FROM table WHERE (IDENTITYCOL NOT IN (SELECT TOP ?1 IDENTITYCOL FROM table order by IDENTITYCOL)) order by IDENTITYCOL
but the below SQL in mysql,how to convert?I enmesh........... select pageid,pagename,pageaddr,pageauditflag,pageartaudi tflag,startplaytime from pageinfo where entryid= ?1 and startplaytime= ?2 limit ?3, ?4
hi,I have a question.Maybe You know the equivalent to command LIMIT from MySQLI couldn`t find something like this in MS SQLPSI try to display 10 records begining form e.g. 4 sort by idsomething like: "SELECT * FROM table WHERE name=... LIMIT 4, 10 ORDER BY id"in MySQLthanx,Urban
I recently read up and found an msdn forum post that said the 4gb limit only applied to data files not log files.
However recently i had an error on a sql express database saying that the log file was full, the database log file was set to auto grow and there was plenty of space left.
So i am guessing the 4gb limit applies to any database file mdf or ldf, is this correct ?
I have the fields in my table: ID, Title, Description, Price, ImageData, Active I only want it to be possible to have two records at any time with Active=Yes. Active is a Bit, Yes/No, field. Any help is appreciated. Chuck
I have an application with a DAL that has an interface with SQL Server. The application has 400 users that open the web forms. My question is: Is there a limit of the parallel connections that can be opened? Or the IIS is managing all the access to the DB? Should I worry about the performance Or it's normal behaviour for ASP.NET applications?
SQL takes all CPU resource on some of the intensive queries. Is any way to make sure there is something left for other tasks to be processed? Let's say limit SQL to use no more than 80% of CPU.
There is at present (as we accidently found) limitation of MSSQL to return per row maximally 8060 bytes. Message like this comes: "Cannot create a row of size 8279 which is greater than the allowable maximum of 8060". My questions are : - Is there any way how to pass it? If I split into more tables (as I have it now) and ask for result where these tables are connected over any ID the result is the same. If I use stored procedures it seems to be ok. Any other idea? - Will be this ok in SQL server 2005?
I have an application that uses a small SQL Server database. What I need is to prevent the access of an amount of users to the database. At the beginning I want to limit the access only for 2 users but I want to be able in the future to grant the access to more.
MySQL has a convenient syntax for paging data that looks like this: SELECT * FROM MyTable LIMIT 10, 20 That would select 10 records, starting from record 20, so that it returns records 20 - 30. This is convenient way to page data, without returning anymore rows than than you need.
However, MS SQL doesn't appear to support that syntax. What is the equivalent sql code to select any N rows from an arbitrary starting point, without having to create a stored procedure?
Quick question, is there a record limit in MSSQL assuming that we don't use a identity key. I am going to be using a table to sava mail server logs. It will create about 5000 records a minute. Also are there any perfomrance issues once you reach a certain numberof records, assuiming i am indexing one of the columns.
Hi, I am working on building SSIS Packages which will need to extract records from OLTP Servers, and i am half way through building the package, i wanted to test if it is able to extract the records from a particular table on OLTP....basicall i want to test if the package built so far running good?....but the extraction part takes ages as there are millions of records in the OLTP ...i want to limit those records to say some thousands so that i can test it and work on cleaning part in the staging and later after all the chunks are working perfectly i want to set it completely to run for extracting all the millions of records.
I am working on a report split into 2 Excel spreadsheets because it is roughtly 350 columns wide. I know this exceeds the MS Access column limit, but is there a way to build this in a single table in SQL Server? If not, does anyone have any ideas.
I have a table tblclients where all my client information is. In my application, I can assign a client to a therapist which is simply inserting the client id (intclientId) into the table with the inttherapistId and the authorid was completed the transaction. because we want to know the history of the transfers, I have to have a separate table other wise I could have just crated a field in the client table for the therapist id.
Simply enough.
The problem is when I assign the client to a therapist more than once, on the client log (the screen that shows all my clients) the client appears twice- once for each therapist he has been assigned to. I only want the client to appear once- and show the name of the latest therapist he has been assigned to not all the therapist. The way I did the select was to do an left outer join on the tbltransfer based on the client id. Works but like I said it gives me the client twice, if I assign them to the therapist more than once. So here is my statement:
select c.strfirstname, c.strlastname, c.intlocationId from tblclients c left outer tbltransfer t on t.intclientId = c.intclientId
this works, but if I have more than one record for the same client in the tbltranfer (if I assign the client more than once) then the recordset that is returned contains two records- one for each therapist assigned and that my problem.
I'm storing time series data in a table in SQL server 2000. The tablehas columns like: CodeEquity, PriceDate, LastPrice. To extract thelast price for a number of equities on COMMON DATES I have used thequery:select t.LastPrice,h1.LastPrice,h2.LastPrice,h3.LastPrice fromBlg_HistoricData t,Blg_HistoricData h1,Blg_HistoricDatah2,Blg_HistoricData h3where t.CodeEquity=114151 and h1.CodeEquity=112220 andt.PriceDate=h1.PriceDate and h2.CodeEquity=112580 andt.PriceDate=h2.PriceDate and h3.CodeEquity=112228 andt.PriceDate=h3.PriceDatethis works for about 20 self joined tables and then says syntax error.I'm wondering what sql limits it hits. Is it possible to do this inSQL for 300 tables?Thank you.
Hi, guys!Some of my applications are sharing same SQL login/password to connectto a database called "MyDB" on server "MyServer" . The password isencrypted and stored in registry or some configuration file theapplications use. The applications use certain arithmetic to decryptthe password and then connect to MyDB.The problem is a few developers know the arithmetic. So virtuallythere is no security here.I am wondering whether I can do anything on the MyServer/MyDB to limitthe access to the database so that only connection from certainservers are allowed. Say I only want connection with this knowncredential to be established if it is from server "Mybox". Noconnections from any other servers will be allowed. So even thedevelopers know the login/password, they won't be able to do anythingif they do have the access to server "MyBox".(I know some of you would ask why I don't use application roles. Let'ssay it's due to "historical" reasons and it's not totally up to me tochange the way the developers use database.)Any idea? Triggers in Master? Not a good idea, isn't it?Thanks in advance,Gary
Does anyone know if there is a way to limit certain users/logins to only use 1 CPU on a box with 4 processors? I need to somehow restrict CPU utilization for a user and I'm wondering if this can even be done in SQL Server 2005. Any help would be appreciated.
We're very interested in having our application use SQL/e but we can't have the 4 gig limit. It makes sense to me that SQL/e simply should not be able to access a file over the network, and then you wouldn't have any reason to put a 4 gig limit on it.
At that point it becomes a very flexible alternative for remote users that need to have a large amount of data (i.e. documents, images etc.) with them.
We'd love to start building an abstraction layer so that we can support both SQL Server and SQL/e so that we can support network and remote users and not have the nightmare that is SQL Server Express installation. (care of the windows installer group's bugs...)
Is there a size limit on the upgrade.exe to convert the SQL 2.0 SDF file to the SQL Mobile 2005/SqL CE 3.0?
I have a 184M SDF that I tried putting through the upgrade but i got an error that it exceed a 128M limit? Is there a way around it? maybe another parameter I need to pass in?
Please, please, please, please just add limit/offset to the language. 7 years of working around this unnecessary limitation are enough. And that's just me personally, i'm sure there are those out there with a longer history and are more irritated. I know this isn't the first post on this here, nor will it be the last. I think that should be taken as a hint, and something should be done about this. Something like this: SELECT column FROM table LIMIT 10 OFFSET 10
See, it wasn't that hard =) Now there are no ugly contortions to go through just to paginate the data. And don't recommend I return all 20k rows and do it on the client side, m'kay, or write ridiculous sql. It seems that for all the hard work that went into making those other features work that this could have been done. Don't lie, you know it could have! If there was a voting feature for suggested improvments, or a bug tracker + watch list that functioned the same, it would help. Others do that, as well.
//Another Annoyed DeveloperAnd seeing as there aren't any feature/suggestion channels that work (see:connect), I guess this forum is the best we can do. Sorry.
