visual studio.net seems to default to single batch mode when running
sql scripts. does anyone know how to change this behavior? typical
batches will include object existence, drop, and create batches prior
to processing. i have attempted removing the graphical plan, using
batch separator 'go', and the vba trick using ';' to no avail.
tia
I am using SQL Server Express and Visual Studio 2005. I am new to batches and am trying to understand how they work. I am trying to write a query that creates an assembly and the functions that are contained in it. Here is my query:
USE ProductsDRM
GO
IF NOT EXISTS (SELECT 'True' FROM sys.assemblies WHERE name = 'ComputedColumnFunctions')
BEGIN
CREATE ASSEMBLY ComputedColumnFunctions
FROM 'C:WebsitesAssemblyTestStoredFunctionsStoredFunctionsinStoredFunctions.dll'
GO
CREATE FUNCTION fImageFileName
(
@ProductID int,
@ImageSizeCode nvarchar(4000)
)
RETURNS nvarchar(4000)
AS EXTERNAL NAME [ComputedColumnFunctions].[StoredFunctions.UserDefinedFunctions].ImageFileName
GO
CREATE FUNCTION fTestInt
(
@ProductID int
)
RETURNS int
AS EXTERNAL NAME [ComputedColumnFunctions].[StoredFunctions.UserDefinedFunctions].TestInt
GO
CREATE FUNCTION fTestInt2
(
@TestInt int
)
RETURNS int
AS EXTERNAL NAME [ComputedColumnFunctions].[StoredFunctions.UserDefinedFunctions].TestInt2
END
ELSE
BEGIN
PRINT 'The assembly named "ComputedColumnFunctions" already exists. No new assembly was created.'
END
GO
I read in a book about SQL Server 2005 about including a test for whether the object (such as assembly in this case) exists before trying to create it. If I only include the CREATE ASSEMBLY statement and the FROM line below it and delete the next GO down through the last CREATE FUNCTION (just before the END ELSE), it works fine. If I leave it as is, I get a runtime error on the GO line just after the CREATE ASSEMBLY statement. What am I doing wrong?
I have an application that processes a large number of input files in a CSV format and then posts the data to a table on SQL Server Express.
The data table can end up very large and I have no requirements to store all the data locally.
I have included the table in my DataSet using visual studio express so I have access to the schema, but will not run Fill() on it.
Ideally I would like to process a CSV file at a time.
I can add records to my local (empty) data table and when I am happy, I can call tableAdapter.Update() or dataSet.DataTable.AcceptChanges() to generate lots of SQL 'INSERT' commands to update the physical database at the server end.
I would then like to empty my local data table (so it doesn't get too big) and repeat the same process over again for each CSV file.
How can I empty my local table without causing it to generate a load of SQL 'DELETE' commands? I want to empty the table and fool ADO.NET into thinking that everything is synchronised, as if it has just done an update but actually hasn't.
Regards
I have a production table with 400 million rows.
I have a staging table which has 48 million rows. This data is the same as the production data, except one column has a different value.
Create Table Production
(
Id Int Identity(1,1),
Code Varchar(20),
ReferenceSequence int
)
-- Staging Table
Create Table Staging
(
Code Varchar(20),
NewSequence int
)
I need to update the production table with the newSequence value from staging to replace the ReferenceSequence. I.e:
Update Production
Set ReferenceSequence = Staging.NewSequence
From Staging
where Production.Code = Staging.CodeHowever, updating 48 million rows at once will generate a lot of logging!
How can I do 1 million rows at a time, commit the changes then do the next million?
I've tried some of the examples on the following page [URL], but they look to just update the tables with the same values.
Hello SQL Team!
I'm stuck at this problem for days and need help.
The problem is with the GO keyword. I know the GO causes the batch to get executed and all local variables are lost. But I can't seem to find a work around. I would like each stored procedure to get executed in different batches.
create table sql_cmd(cmd nvarchar(255))
insert into sql_cmd(cmd) values('exec user_sp param1,''param2'')
insert into sql_cmd(cmd) values('exec user_sp2 param1,''param2'')
declare @sql nvarchar(255)
declare c_sql cursor --small table peformance not a problem. Also open to other suggestions
for select cmd from sqlcmd
open c_sql
fetch next from c_sql
into @sql
while @@fetch_status = 0
begin
print @sql
exec sp_executesql @sql
GO
fetch next from c_sql
into @sql
end
Recently I was stumped on a problem where I was granting permissions to a user, from within a script that was creating a stored procedure. Then I would check the permissions on the procedure, but the permissions were empty. It turned out that I was missing a "go" statement to seperate the create procedure statement from the grant statement. So that got me to thinking about what other kids of statements must be seperated into seperate batches ? I would thik that anything that is being created must be seperated from any statements that grant or alter permissions, because the items would need to exist first.
comments ?
So i tweaked a stored procedure that did a 1 hour update for a specific countryId.
If that procedure was called at the same time with two different countryId than one update took place and afterwards the other.
Since all the rows are distinct i switched to an batch update only updating 10000 rows at a time ( and not all of the 2 million).
The general locking looked better afterwards but now i receive strange deadlocks.
My theory:
TX1 Updates a row on Page1 (P1) with rowlock. TX2 also does this on P1. Now TX1 deceides to escalate to PAGELOCK. TX1 waits for TX2 to be done with the row so it can lock the page. TX2 waits for TX1 to leave the page since TX2 may also want to pagelock.
Everybody waits for each other so we have a deadlock. Is that feasible ? OR is there another common problem when doing batch updates on the same table with distinct rows ( that can be on a same datapage ofc).
I have a query batch "update" script that upgrades my users database from,say version 0 to version 1, or from version 1 to version 2. I would like toknow how I can wrap the entire script in a transaction, so that either thewhole thing succeeds or none of it does.For example:BEGIN TRANSACTION.......... Alter some tables.....GO.......... Alter a stored procedure.....GO.......... Create a new stored procedure.....GOCOMMIT TRANSACTIONorROLLBACK TRANSACTIONGO(how do I get to the "ROLLBACK TRANSACTION" if an error occurs in the updatescript?)
View 2 Replies View RelatedHi,
I would like to delete a data from a 750million row table in chunks of 10000,without blocking the users.As ours is a 24/7 shop I donot want to block the users for a long time.
Answer for this is highly appreciated.
Thanks
Samna
I have 2 tables with this schema
CREATE TABLE tableValues(
[LASTENCRYPTIONDT] [datetime] NULL,
[ENCRYPTIONID] [int] NULL,
[NAME] [varchar](50) NULL
[Code] ....
I want to update tableToUpdate in batches of 5000 per batch and set the lastenecryptionDT to null based on the the join to the tableValues using the column ENCRYPTIONID, and also output updated rows into another table. Incase I would need to do a rollback.
I need to group up the records randomly into ‘n’ number of batches. That can be done by NTILE, but I want group up similar records in single group.
Say for example, following is the list of records I have in my table which I want to group into 5 batches
A123
A124
A124
A123
A127
After Ntile I will get the below,
Desired output is, Need output like Ntile but all same id should reside in single batch
Even if I n=5, maximum possibility of batches are 3 only.
I want to include GO statements to execute a large stored procedure in batches, how can I do that?
View 9 Replies View RelatedIn another forum post, a poster was deleting large numbers of rows from a table in batches of 50,000.
In the bad old days ('80s - '90s), I used to have to delete rows in batches of 500, then 1000, then 5000, due to the size of the transaction rollback segments (yes - Oracle).
I always found that increasing the number of deleted rows in a single statement/transaction improved overall process speed - up to some magic point, at which some overhead in the system began slowing the deletes down, so that deleting a single batch of 10,000 rows took more than twice as much time as deleting two batches of 5,000 rows each.
good rule-of-thumb numbers (or even better, some actual statistics and/or explanations) as to how many records should be deleted in a single transaction/statement for optimum speed? 50,000 - 100,000 - 1,000,000 or unlimited? Are there significant differences between 2008, 2012, 2014?
We are using the Transfer SQL Server Objects Task to transfer a large table. The trans log is filling up for this table. Is there a method to split the Data Transfer Task into smaller batches? (Smaller tables are transferring without issue.)
Thanks.
We have a SQLServer 2005 Enterprise merge replication publication with SQL Mobile 3.0 subscribers (Windows Mobile 5.0 and 6.0). We do not use pre-computed partitions due to trigger performance issues with an SSIS/ETL application that supplies data to the merge database. We do use the "Optimize" (=true) option, though we have tried this both ways with no significant differences. We use filters and joins for each worker ID (as HOST_ID) from the subscriptions.
The sync times become increasingly worse after we run the snapshot and bring the publication online. I have tried rerunning the snapshots, this helps little, as it often behaves like the subscription was set to reinitialize and forces a big sync (reload of all data) to the subscriber. We have tried much of the obvious (e.g., flattening filters and joins, adding indexes, etc.).
When users are synchronizing, we watch replication monitor and notice that a lot of time is spent processing "enumerating inserts and updates for article [any article]", especially processing the many generations and batches. This is true for any follow-up syncs after the 1st big sync (initializing the subscription).
I read several posts regarding the batches and generations of changes, and decided to try increasing the €œDownloadGenerationsPerBatch€?. I tried adding this parameter to the snapshot agent job, and the job fails each time with a vague message, even with the default value of 100. How do you change this parameter for SQLServer 2005 Enterprise?
Any suggestions?
Thanks in advance,
Matt