Can a View include an identity column? If a view can include an identity column, how do you go about setting a column as an identity column.
Also how do you go about removing an identity property that may exist on column in a View
I am using SQL Server 2005.
I have this but how can I get all the columns of the row? I only want them distinct per these 2 cols.
SELECT DISTINCT OrdHst.ordernbr, OrdNbr.trans
FROM OrdHst JOIN OrdNbr
ON OrdHst.ordernbr = OrdNbr.ordernbr
ORDER BY 1,2
Could return:
12345 001
12345 AAA
12345 BBB
12345 CCC
12345 PWB
Hi,
SQL Server 2005 has a new very useful feature for creating non-clustered indexes called INCLUDE <columns> which are very helpful when trying to create covering indexes.
Does anyone know of a way to retrieve these INCLUDE columns through any of the system metadata tables? The sp_helpIndex stored procedure is what I currently use but that only returns the (sorted) index columns and not the include columns.
Thanks in advance,
Gordon Radley
How to include row values as columns in my select query. I have a table that stores comments for different sections in a web application. In the table below, I would like display each comment as a new column. I only want one row for each record_ID.
Existing table layout
table name - tblcomments
Record_ID Comment_Section_ID Comment
1 5 Test 5 comment
1 7 Test 7 comment
2 5 New comment
2 7 Old comment
3 5 Stop
3 7 Go
Desired table layout
table name - #tempComment
Record_ID Comment_Section_5 Comment_Section_7
1 Test 5 comment Test 7 comment
2 New comment old comment
3 Stop Go
Once I figure out how to get the data in the layout above, I will need to join the table with my record table.
table name - tblRecord
Record_ID Record_Type_ID Record_Status
1 23 Closed
2 56 Open
3 67 Open
4 09 Closed
5 43 In progress
I would like to be able to join the tables in the query below for the final output.
Select r.Record_ID, r.Record_Type_ID, r.Record_Status,
c.Comment_Section_5, c.Comment_Section_7
from tblRecord r
left outer join #tempComment c
on r.record_ID = c.record_ID
How I can get the data in the desired #tempComment table layout mentioned above?
Usually it is better to include the columns in the index that are in where clause, select list and join.I am thinking that the columns in the selected list is better to keep as index columns and the columns that are in the where clause is better to keep in key columns.Where do we use join column is it better to create as main key column or included column.
View 4 Replies View RelatedHi,
I am planning to use transacational replication (instead of merge replication) on my SQL server 2000. My application is already live and is being used by real users.
How can I ensure that replicated data on different server would have exact same values of identity columns and date columns (where every I set default date to getdate())?
It is very important for me to have a mirror image of data (without using clustering servers).
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks,
-Niraj
Hi there,
I'm new to SQL Server please help me, i want to create identity column(AutoNumber) when creating views.
Based on a table like below I have created a report so that I can compare number of items in the main warehouse (LOCATION1) and the outlets (LOCATION2 and LOCATION3).
___________________________________
| ID | PRODUCT_INDEX | LOCATION | VALUE |
___________________________________
| 1 | INDEX1 | LOCATION1 | 1 |
___________________________________
| 2 | INDEX1 | LOCATION2 | 1 |
___________________________________
| 3 | INDEX1 | LOCATION3 | 0 |
___________________________________
| 4 | INDEX2 | LOCATION1 | 0 |
___________________________________
| 5 | INDEX2 | LOCATION2 | 0 |
___________________________________
| 6 | INDEX2 | LOCATION3 | 1 |
___________________________________
| 7 | INDEX3 | LOCATION1 | 1 |
___________________________________
| 8 | INDEX3 | LOCATION2 | 0 |
___________________________________
| 9 | INDEX3 | LOCATION3 | 1 |
___________________________________
The way I present data in my Report is as such. I want to show items that are available in the warehouse that should be moved to the outlets.
select
a.PRODUCT_INDEX
, a.LOCATION1(VALUE)
, b.LOCATION2(VALUE)
, c.LOCATION3(VALUE)
from
[Code] .....
__________________________________________________________________
| PRODUCT_INDEX | LOCATION1 (VALUE) | LOCATION2 (VALUE) | LOCATION3 (VALUE)|
__________________________________________________________________
| INDEX1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
__________________________________________________________________
| INDEX2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
__________________________________________________________________
| INDEX3 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
__________________________________________________________________
I have added some parameters in my report to filter out products that are not available in warehouse (LOCATION1) and this works great.
select * from VIEW where 'LOCATION1(VALUE)' > 0 and ('LOCATION2(VALUE)' = 0 or 'LOCATION3(VALUE)' = 0)
__________________________________________________________________
| PRODUCT_INDEX | LOCATION1 (VALUE) | LOCATION2 (VALUE) | LOCATION3 (VALUE)|
__________________________________________________________________
| INDEX1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
__________________________________________________________________
| INDEX3 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
__________________________________________________________________
Now the issue starts when I add a parameter to my report for user to choose which outlets (LOCATIONs) he wants in the equation. I know how to make a column disappear based on parameter value but how to take it out of equation? At the moment when user selects only LOCATION2 and not LOCATION3 then data is not filtered correctly:
__________________________________________________
| JOIN_ON_VALUES | LOCATION1 (VALUE) | LOCATION2 (VALUE) |
__________________________________________________
| INDEX1 | 1 | 1 |
__________________________________________________
| INDEX3 | 1 | 0 |
__________________________________________________
Ideally I would like a user to select random outlets (warehouse would be static on the report) and compare one or multiple and only show records that are 0 in the outlets.
Just to confirm, do identity columns and XML columns work OK with database mirroring ? That is, all data types are supported with mirroring, and identities aren't an issue ?
Transactional replication with identity columns was a right pain in the **** in SQL 2000. I'm assuming that mirroring doesn't have these issues, but want to be sure.
I have a view which at the moment has no unique identifier on each record. When I try adding a column definition to the view such as NEWID() as TransactionId, the view then cannot 1) be selected into a temporary table, or 2) queried on other columns in the table. In either case I end up with an empty result set.
I believe I have a way around this for my purpose, which was principally testability. However, can anyone enlighten me as to how and why this happens?
Andrew Raymond
grant SELECT on all_columns to yogi_bear;
grant SELECT on all_objects to yogi_bear;
grant SELECT on all_views to yogi_bear;
but it doesn't work, why? I know how to do it with a cursor or dynamic sql, but why won't these sql statements work?
Q: How do I use Calculated Columns from a Data Source View in an OLEDB Data Source Adapter.
I took the following steps:
- Created new SSIS project
- Added a Data Source connecting to a SQLServer2005 DB (MyDataSource)
- Added a Data Source View based on MyDataSource (MyDSV)
- Created a Calcualted field to Table Object MyTable (MyCalcField)
- Added a Connection Manager based on MyDSV
- Added Data Flow to Project
- Added OLEDB Source Adapter to Data Flow
- Attempting to Access Calculated Field MyCalcField to be used in Data Flow.
ISSUE: I can't seem to find a way to get the Calculated field to pass through. It's as though this metadata is not available to the Flow.
Anyone have any ideas?
Thanks - MikeyNero
I'm recreating many of my DBA scripts that no longer work in 2005 due to the rework of system tables. It's a risk I lived with knowing that someday the system tables would change. I'm now encountering collation problems, which I do not understand. I know how to fix the problem, but I don't know why the collation issues exist in the first place.
Run the following command.
Select * From sys.all_objects a JOIN master..spt_values b on a.type = b.type
You will receive the following error.
Msg 468, Level 16, State 9, Line 1
Cannot resolve the collation conflict between "SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS" and "Latin1_General_CI_AS_KS_WS" in the equal to operation.
Now run sp_help 'sys.all_objects' and look at the collation defintion for columns "type" and "type_desc". In my environment they have a collation of Latin1_General_CI_AS_KS_WS. This is different then the overall default collation of SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS, thus causing the error.
My question is why did Microsoft need to make this collation different for these columns?
Any ideas?
Thanks, Dave
Can anyone describe how SQLServer calculates identity
columns? Does it use some internal counter when generating the next identity,
or something a little more mundane such as gets the highest existing identity
value at the point of the insertion and increments it by the IDENT_INCR value
of the identity column?I’m not worrying about reliability or gaps in values, but i
am wondering if it would be less efficient for me to manually manage the
identity/primary key in the form of a counter in another table used to generate
the new identity, or simply let the DB do it for me. I dont mind if there are
gaps in the sequence etc. so would it be less efficient for me to calculate the
field than SQLServer itself? Basically, is the overhead to the DB of me doing
it greater than the overhead of the app doing it...Thanks
First off I am NOT a DBA.
I have a question about IDENTITY columns. I am working for a client that has an entire employee database that uses IDENTITY columns without any Primary keys defined. I have never seen this done. Is it ok or should I recommend that it be changed to use Primary keys?
The DBA that built the database is no longer with the company and the client has no DBA. Where can I get some information on how to use IDENTITY columns? I did not get much from the help file.
TIA
Nate
Where do I find the seed and increment values of the identity column in database.
If possile can u suggest query for that Pl.
Thanx in advance
-ali
I have been using the following query to identify the IDENTITY columnsin a given table. (The query is inside an application.)select column_namefrom information_schema.columnswhere table_schema = 'user_a' andtable_name = 'tab_a' andcolumnproperty(object_id(table_name), column_name, 'IsIdentity') = 1This works. When "user_a" performs the query, everything is OK.Now, another user wanted to use the same application. So, "user_b"clicks on a button, and the exact same query as above is run. (Nosubstitutions are made; user_b is trying to see the identity column in[user_a].[tab_a]). However, the query returns null, instead of theidentity column name. User_b can read the table and select from itjust fine.Why am I getting two different results against the same query? Do Ineed to rewrite the query to go against different information schemaviews?
View 5 Replies View RelatedI'm seeing some weird behavior regarding identity columns in MSSQL 2000.In a specific client database we have this table:
ID Name SecLevDG Flags ----------- ----------------- ----------- ----------- 1029528 xxx 0 01029529 xxx 0 01049676 xxx 0 0
While upgrading this database to a later version of our product, some schema changes are necessary. For this particular table, the changes are
alter table Authority drop constraint apkAuthorityId
alter table Authority drop column SecLevDg
alter table Authority add new_id integer identity
This code has worked perfectly for years, and even in this particular database, there are no error messages. However, the result isn't quite the expected:
ID Name Flags new_id ----------- ---------------- ----------- ----------- 1029528 xxx 0 167772201029529 xxx 0 167772201049676 xxx 0 16777220
Notice that the new column did NOT get unique values 1, 2, 3, etc... In other tests I manage to get different values, but still not the expected ones. Is this a bug in MSSQL 2000?
DBCC CHECKIDENT returns:
Checking identity information: current identity value '1', current column value '1'.
DBCC CHECKDB returns no errors before running the above statement. Afterwards it returns this (only relevant messages included):
Server: Msg 8970, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Row error: Object ID 293576084, index ID 0, page ID (1:277), row ID 0. Column 'new_id' was created NOT NULL, but is NULL in the row.
Server: Msg 8970, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Row error: Object ID 293576084, index ID 0, page ID (1:277), row ID 1. Column 'new_id' was created NOT NULL, but is NULL in the row.
Server: Msg 8970, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Row error: Object ID 293576084, index ID 0, page ID (1:1145), row ID 0. Column 'new_id' was created NOT NULL, but is NULL in the row.
[...]
CHECKDB found 0 allocation errors and 3 consistency errors in table 'Authority' (object ID 293576084).
Regards,
Oskar Berggren
I have an app that has multiple users inserting and updating from a couple key tables using SQL Server 2005.
In my previous SQL coding life, I was able to make use of sequence.NextVal to find and lock the next available sequence value for a table. Currently I am in the SQL Server 2005 world and cannot do this. I have found all sorts of help for Ident_currentand Identity columns, but nothing on how to accomplish the same as a NextVal did. I can add one to the Ident_Curr but I think I run the risk of that value being used by another user before the current user can get his update in. Is that correct? Is there a way to accomplish what I am trying to do?
Basically what I need to do is when a user inserts a record in table "Loads" I need to insert behind the scenes to table "Comments" with the ID of the row created in the "Loads" table.
Thank you in advance,
Garth
Hello there,
I am using sql 2000 dts package to migrate a databse to SQL Server 2005, everything works except for identity columns, SQL Server reorder the columns, and this breaks the referential integrity. Is there a way to stop that? Your help is appreciated.
I use the identity = yes for my unique columns in most of my tables that need it. I am trying to decide if I should change identity = no, and instead manually update my unique number column myself by adding one when I insert new rows.
The reason I want to do this is for maintainabilty and ease of transfering data for backup to other sql servers. I always have trouble keeping the identity numbers to stay the same as they are in the original database because when they are transfered to a db that has identity = yes, the numbers get rearranged.
It will also make it easier to transfer data from original db to another sql server db and use the data right away without having to configure the destination db to disable identity and then enable it, etc.
Any pro's con's appreciated,
Dan
(Long post)
I have a production database with about half the tables using
IDENTITY columns for PRIMARY KEYS. This system is configured as both
a Publisher and a Distributor. We are using Transactional Replication
without updates. The SQL Server Agent runs every hour to pick up any
changes and replicate them to the Subscriber (another SQL Server
machine configured as our failover server).
Both servers are running SQL Server 7.0 (original, no service packs)
under Windows NT 4.0 (SP4).
The failover server (the replication Subscriber) will only be used if
the primary server goes down. And hopefully, only for a short time
before the primary server comes back online. During the time that the
failover is actually being used, the application will not make any
changes to the database.
The IDENTITY values that are replicated need to stay with their
original values. The replication process CANNOT assign new values to
these columns when there are inserted into the database on the
Publisher (i.e. failover server)
My question is: According to the documention, I can add 'NOT FOR
REPLICATION' to the IDENTITY columns and the values will be
preserved. But a collegue of mine says that resets the IDENTITY
sequence on the subscriber and the 2nd time a row gets inserted on
the Publisher, the values get messed up. On his system, he calls a
stored procedure for the tables with IDENTITY columns, and in the
stored procedure, he executes a 'SET IDENTITY_INSERT OFF', then
INSERTS the row, then 'SET IDENTITY_INSERT ON'. He claims that this
approach solved his issues with IDENTITY columns.
Who is right? Do I have to create a stored procedure for replication
for every table with an IDENTITY column, or can I just add 'NOT FOR
REPLICATION' and SQL Server will handle the rest?
NOTE: Upgrading to SQL Server 2000 is NOT an option right now.
Although, if a Service Pack for 7 fixes this, that might be an option.
Thanks in advance for any help you can shed on this issue.
Dave
We are trying to run replication from one server to another. Most of the tables in the publishing database have identity columns set. At one point the subscribing database had a match of identity columns and primary keys matching the publishing database. Obviously with a primary key set on the subscriber there would be conflicts with duplicate key inserts. We disabled the identity columms and droped the indexes and the data was able to replicate over. However, we discovered that the identity columns, which are used to generate id's on many of our tables, were not replicating over to the subscriber. In fact a null value was being inserted into the subsriber database.
Anyone seen this before? What, if there is one, is the solution?
Thanks,
Brad
hi there.
I was wondering is there any way that you can use an Identity Column on both a subcribing and Publishing table in Replication,
I am receiving errors when I run Replication with Identity Columns,
Thanks in advance
Fin
Hi folks! I've a merge replication setup b/w two servers.
Published tables have columns (INT IDENTITY SEED 1 INCREMENT[NOT FOR REPLICATION]).
Whenever i apply the SNAPSHOT, i have to run DBCC CHECKIDENT('table' RESEED) for each table at the subscriber twice, for the values in the columns are almost always greater than the ID-Seed value. For example the last Identity value in the column is 999 but whenever i insert a new row; i get error; couldn't insert duplicate value into the table. When i run the dbcc check i see the following message:
"Checking identity information: current identity value '1', current column value '999'."
How do i square this away?
Anyone know if MS-SQL Server supports IDENTITY columns that are incremented for each new value of the column it depends on.
For exameple:
Let's say I have a client table with a ClientID column as it's PRIMARY KEY.
This column can be an auto-incrementing IDENTITY column.
Then I have an orders table. The PRIMARY KEY for the orders table is composed of (ClientID, OrderID). I would like the OrderID to be an IDENTITY field that increments by an arbitrary value (1 in this case) for every new value of ClientID...therefore creating a unique PRIMARY KEY.
The contents of the table would look like this
ClientID OrderID
------- -------
1 0
1 1
2 0
1 2
2 1
2 2
1 3
and so on....
MySQL (and maybe other RDMS's...I haven't checked) seems to do this automatically when you set a column as AUTOINCREMENT and then define a composite PRIMARY KEY on two fields.
I know this can be done manually using triggers, but I was wondering if there was a better way...
Thanks in advance
Hi,
I noticed that tables containing IDENTITY columns skip IDENTITY values when a transaction is rolled back. Is there any way to avoid this? By "avoid" I mean make the table continue generating IDENTITY values from where the last COMMITTED insert took place.
Example:
CREATE TABLE ATable (A INT IDENTITY, B INT);
INSERT INTO ATable (B) VALUES (39);
INSERT INTO ATable (B) VALUES (51);
INSERT INTO ATable (B) VALUES (62);
INSERT INTO ATable (B) VALUES (93);
INSERT INTO ATable (B) VALUES (10);
ATable will now contain the following values:
A___B___
1___39__
2___51__
3___62__
4___93__
5___10__
Now let's say I do this:
BEGIN TRAN MyTranName;
INSERT INTO ATable (B) VALUES(44);
INSERT INTO ATable (B) VALUES(32);
INSERT INTO ATable (B) VALUES(11);
ROLLBACK TRAN MyTranName;
The three new rows won't (obviously) be in the table as my TRANSACTION was rolled back.
However, if I do this :
INSERT INTO ATable (B) VALUES (28);
INSERT INTO ATable (B) VALUES (52);
...My table will now contain the following values:
A___B___
1___39__
2___51__
3___62__
4___93__
5___10__
<I>NEW ENTRIES</I>
9___28__
10__52__
Is there a way to have SQL-Server continue from where it left off (IDENTITY VALUES 6, 7, 8) without having to generate the numbers manually or occasionnally turning on IDENTITY_INSERT on the relevant table(s)?
Thanks.
Hello,
In my application I am using Identity columns. When some rows are deleted from table, This identity values are not filling the gap. I mean My current identity is 5. That means 1 to 5 rows sequentially i inserted. If I am deleting 3rd and 4th rows, next identity will still continue with 6. So is there any method to fill the gap between rows
I have a stored procedure which gets data from several tables in database A and inserts them into the same tables in database B. Before the inserts are done, the data in database B is removed currently by using the TRUNCATE statement.
Unfortunately these tables are now being used for replication and you cannot TRUNCATE a table used for replication.
The issue is that these tables contain an Identity column each and using DELETE means the Identity columns will be incremented from the last value each time. I do not want this to happen.
Is there any way of reseeding an Identity column without using the DBCC CHECKIDENT statement because I do not want the procedures to run under the "sa" context if a DBCC statement was to be incorporated into the stored procedure with a DELETE statement?
many thanks for help
We are on SQL 2014...we have a bunch of views in a database where we are trying to find the views which have more than 16 columns max for unique index/constraint...this is needed so we can convert them to indexed views...
View 1 Replies View Relatedhi.i am using ms sql server 2000. can somebody tell me what the code would be to remove all the values in a given column and replace them with the associated number of the row with each execution. so, if i have a column:nums|1||2||3||4|and somebody deletes record |2|i would like the nums colum to update to|1||2||3|not:|1||3||4|it seems simple but i am having a hard time with this. how is it done?thanks.
View 14 Replies View RelatedNormally when I have a "Many-toMany" or linkage table where the primary key consists of a foreign key from two different tables, I do not bother to make a separate identiy column instead.Does anyone see a reason why an identity column would be more or less desireable ? For exampleTable Person PK - PersonIDTable Car PK - CarIDTable PersonCar PK (PersonID, CarID)Or would it be better to make an Identity Column such as PersonCarID so then the table would look like the following:Table PersonCarPK - (PersonCarID)FK - PersonIDFK - CarIDCreate Unique Constraint on Person and CarIDAny feedback is appreciated
View 46 Replies View RelatedWe have a high load site that requires some redesign. We would like to move the PK generation from a custom scheme to IDENTITY columns.
What are the any scalability issues for using IDENTITY? Will contention issues arise because of row locking?
Thanks in advance.