Search Results

Search found 31931 results on 1278 pages for 'sql statement'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 146/1278 | < Previous Page | 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153  | Next Page >

  • Deployment of SQL Server: installing a second instance?

    - by Workshop Alex
    Simple problem. I'm working on a Delphi 2007/WIN32 application which now uses MS Access as simple data store. I have to modify it to support SQL Server Express, which is easy. These modifications are working so the application can be deployed using either SQL Server or MS Access. (Whatever the user prefers.) I did consider deploying the whole application together with the SQL Compact but this is not practicak. Using SQL Server Express 2008 instead of 2005 is an option, but also has a few nasty side-effects which we don't want to resolve for now. The problem is deploying the whole project. The installation with SQL Server would need a quiet installation so the user won't notice it. SQL Server is mentioned in the documentation so they know it's there. We just don't want to bother them with technical issues. In most cases, such an installation will go just fine. But what if the user already has an SQL Server (2005) installation which is used for something else? Personally, I would prefer to just install a second instance of SQL Server on their system so it won't conflict with the other installation. (Thus, if they uninstall the other app, the SQL instance will just stay installed.) While SQL Server 2005 and 2008 can be installed on the same system simply by using two different names for the instance, I wonder if it's also possible to install SQL Server 2005 twice on a single system to get two instances. And if possible, how?

    Read the article

  • How to limit the number of connections to a SQL Server server from my tomcat deployed java applicati

    - by CJ
    I have an application that is deployed on tomcat on server A and sends queries to a huge variety of SQL Server databases on an server B. I am concerned that my application could overload this SQL Server database server and would like some way to preventing it making requests to connect to any database on that server if some arbitrary number of connections were already in existence and unclosed. I am looking at using connection pooling but am under the impression that this will only pool connections to a specific database on the SQL Server server, I want to control the total of these combined connections that will occur to many different databases (incidentally I can only find out the names of individual db's dynamically as they change day to day). Will connection pooling take care of this for me, are am I looking at this from the wrong perspective? I have no access to the configuration of the SQL Server server. Links to tutorials or working examples of your suggested solution are most welcome!

    Read the article

  • Why would someone use WHERE 1=1 AND <conditions> in a SQL clause?

    - by Bogdan Maxim
    Why would someone use WHERE 1=1 AND <conditions> in a SQL clause (Either SQL obtained through concatenated strings, either view definition) I've seen somewhere that this would be used to protect against SQL Injection, but it seems very weird. If there is injection WHERE 1 = 1 AND injected OR 1=1 would have the same result as injected OR 1=1. Later edit: What about the usage in a view definition?

    Read the article

  • SQL Express 2008 R2 on Amazon EC2 instance: tons of free memory, poor performance

    - by gravyface
    The old SQL Express 2005 was running on a low-end single Xeon CPU Dell server, RAID 5 7200 disks, 2 GB RAM (SBS 2003). I have not done any baseline measurements on the old physical server, but the Web app is used by half a dozen people (maybe 2 concurrently), so I figured "how bad can an Amazon EC2 instance be?". It's pretty horrible: a difference of 8 seconds of load time on one screen. First of all, I'm not a SQL guru, but here's what I've tried: Had a Small Instance, now running a c1.medium (High Cpu Medium) Windows 2008 32-bit R2 EBS-backed instance running IIS 7.5 and SQL Express 2008 R2. No noticeable improvement. Changed Page File from fixed 256 to Automatic. Setup a Striped Mirror from within Disk Management with two attached 1 GB EBS volumes. Moved database and transaction log, left everything else on the boot EBS volume. No noticeable change. Looked at memory, ~1000 MB of physical memory free (1.7 GB total). Changed SQL instance to use a minimum of 1024 RAM; restarted server, no change in memory usage. SQL still only using ~28MB of RAM(!). So I'm thinking: this database is tiny (28MB), why isn't the whole thing cached in RAM? Surely that would speed up performance. The transaction log is 241 MB. Seems kind of large in comparison -- has this not been committed? Is it a cause of performance degradation? I recall something about Recovery Models and log sizes somewhere in my travels, but not positive. Another thing: the old server was running SQL Express 2005. Not sure if that has any impact, but I tried changing the compatibility level from SQL 2000 to 2008, but that had no effect. Anyways, what else can I try here? Seems ridiculous to throw more virtual hardware at this thing. I know I/O is going to be rough on EBS volumes, but surely others are successfully running small .NET/SQL apps on reasonably priced instances?

    Read the article

  • Determining Azure SQL Database requirements

    - by Gerald
    I'm looking into moving an SQL Server database project to the cloud using Azure SQL Database. I'm just wondering what metrics I can use from SQL Server to help determine what my needs will be on Azure. The size of the database is around 150GB, so I understand what my needs are in terms of storage, I'm just not sure what metrics I can use to translate my database usage to the DTU benchmark metrics that the various service tiers on Azure SQL use.

    Read the article

  • Strange Locking Behaviour in SQL Server 2005

    - by SQL Learner
    Can anyone please tell me why does the following statement inside a given stored procedure returns repeated results even with locks on the rows used by the first SELECT statement? BEGIN TRANSACTION DECLARE @Temp TABLE ( ID INT ) INSERT INTO @Temp SELECT ID FROM SomeTable WITH (ROWLOCK, UPDLOCK, READPAST) WHERE SomeValue <= 10 INSERT INTO @Temp SELECT ID FROM SomeTable WITH (ROWLOCK, UPDLOCK, READPAST) WHERE SomeValue >= 5 SELECT * FROM @Temp COMMIT TRANSACTION Any values in SomeTable for which SomeValue is between 5 and 10 will be returned twice, even though they were locked in the first SELECT. I thought that locks were in place for the whole transaction, and so I wasn't expecting the query to return repeated results. Why is this happening?

    Read the article

  • Check services at startup of SQL Server

    - by SQL DBA
    I am trying to check the state of services when SQL Server is started. I am using xp_cmdshell and 'sc query SQLServerAgent | FIND "STATE"' for example to load the output to a global temp table. It works when SQL Server has already started but does not work when the proc is set to autoexec, via sp_procoption.

    Read the article

  • check for null date in CASE statement, where have I gone wrong?

    - by James.Elsey
    Hello, My source table looks like this Id StartDate 1 (null) 2 12/12/2009 3 10/10/2009 I want to create a select statement, that selects the above, but also has an additional column to display a varchar if the date is not null such as : Id StartDate StartDateStatus 1 (null) Awaiting 2 12/12/2009 Approved 3 10/10/2009 Approved I have the following in my select, but it doesn't seem to be working. All of the statuses are set to Approved even though the dates have some nulls select id, StartDate, CASE StartDate WHEN null THEN 'Awaiting' ELSE 'Approved' END AS StartDateStatus FROM myTable The results of my query look like : Id StartDate StartDateStatus 1 (null) Approved 2 12/12/2009 Approved 3 10/10/2009 Approved 4 (null) Approved 5 (null) Approved StartDate is a smalldatetime, is there some exception to how this should be treated? Thanks

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2000 and SSL Encryption

    - by Angry_IT_Guru
    We are a datacenter that hsots a SQL Server 2000 environment which provides database services for a product we sell that is loaded as a rich-client applicatin at each of our many clients and their workstations. Currently today, the application uses straight ODBC connections from the client site to our datacenter. We need to begin encrypting the credentials -- since everything is clear-text today and the authentication is weakly encrypted -- and I'm trying to determine the best way to implement SSL on the server with minimizing the impact of the client. A few things, however: 1) We have our own Windows domain and all our servers are joined to our private domain. Our clietns no nothing of our domain. 2) Typically, our clients connect to our datacenter servers either by: a) Using TCP/IP address b) Using a DNS name that we publish via internet, zone transfers from our DNS servers to our customers, or the client can add static HOSTS entries. 3) From what I understand from enabling encryption is that I can go to the Network Utility and select the "encryption" option for the protocol that I wish to encrypt. Such as TCP/IP. 4) When the encryption option is selected, I have a choice of installing a third-party certificate or a self-signed. I have tested the self-signed, but do have potential issues. I'll explain in a bit. If I go with a third-party cert, such as Verisign, or Network solutions... what kind of certificate do I request? These aren't IIS certificates? When I go create a self-signed via Microsoft's certificate server, I have to select "Authentication certificate". What does this translate to in the third-party world? 5) If I create a self-signed certificate, I understand that the "issue to" name has to match the FQDN for the server that is running SQL. In my case, I have to use my private domain name. If I use this, what does this do for my clients when trying to connect to my SQL Server? Surely they cannot resolve my private DNS names on their network.... I've also verified that when the self-signed certificate is installed, it has to be in the local personal store for the user account that is running SQL Server. SQL Server will only start if the FQDN matches the "issue to" of the certificate and SQL is running under the account that has the certificate installed. If I use a self-signed certificate, does this mean I have to have every one of my clients install it to verify? 6) If I used a third-party certificate, which sounds like the best option, do all my clients have to have internet access when accessing my private servers of their private WAN connection to use to verify the certificate? What do I do about the FQDN? It sounds like they have to use my private domain name -- which is not published -- and can no longer use the one that I setup for them to use? 7) I plan on upgrading to SQL 2000 soon. Is setup of SSL any easier/better with SQL 2005 than SQL 2000? Any help or guiadance would be appreciated

    Read the article

  • How to export SQL Server data from corrupted database (with disk write error)

    - by damitamit
    IT realised there was a disk write error on our production SQL Server 2005 and hence was causing the backups to fail. By the time they had realised this the nightly backup was old, so were not able to just restore the backup on another server. The database is still running and being used constantly. However DBCC CheckDB fails. Also the SQL Server backup task fails, Copy Database fails, Export Data Wizard fails. However it seems all the data can be read from the tables (i.e using bcp etc) Another observation I have made is that the Transaction Log is nearly double the size of the Database. (Does that mean all the changes arent being written to the MDF?) What would be the best plan of attack to get the database to a state where backups are working and the data is safe? Take the database offline and use the MDF/LDF to somehow create the database on another sql server? Export the data from the database using bcp. Create the database (use the Generate Scripts function on the corrupt db to create the schema on the new db) on another sql server and use bcp again to import the data. Some other option that is the right course of action in this situation? The IT manager says the data is safe as if the server fails, the data can be restored from the mdf/ldf. I'm not sure so insisted that we start exporting the data each night as a failsafe (using bcp for example). IT are also having issues on the hardware side of things as supposedly the disk error in on a virtualized disk and can't be rebuilt like a normal raid array (or something like that). Please excuse my use of incorrect terminology and incorrect assumptions on how Sql Server operates. I'm the application developer and have been called to help (as it seems IT know less about SQL Server than I do). Many Thanks, Amit Results of DBBC CheckDB: Msg 1823, Level 16, State 2, Line 1 A database snapshot cannot be created because it failed to start. Msg 7928, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 The database snapshot for online checks could not be created. Either the reason is given in a previous error or one of the underlying volumes does not support sparse files or alternate streams. Attempting to get exclusive access to run checks offline. Msg 5030, Level 16, State 12, Line 1 The database could not be exclusively locked to perform the operation. Msg 7926, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 Check statement aborted. The database could not be checked as a database snapshot could not be created and the database or table could not be locked. See Books Online for details of when this behavior is expected and what workarounds exist. Also see previous errors for more details. Msg 823, Level 24, State 3, Line 1 The operating system returned error 1(error not found) to SQL Server during a write at offset 0x00000674706000 in file 'G:\AX40_Dynamics_Live.mdf'. Additional messages in the SQL Server error log and system event log may provide more detail. This is a severe system-level error condition that threatens database integrity and must be corrected immediately. Complete a full database consistency check (DBCC CHECKDB). This error can be caused by many factors; for more information, see SQL Server Books Online.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2005 Blocking Problem (ASYNC_NETWORK_IO)

    - by ivankolo
    I am responsible for a third-party application (no access to source) running on IIS and SQL Server 2005 (500 concurrent users, 1TB data, 8 IIS servers). We have recently started to see significant blocking on the database (after months of running this application in production with no problems). This occurs at random intervals during the day, approximately every 30 minutes, and affects between 20 and 100 sessions each time. All of the sessions eventually hit the application time out and the sessions abort. The problem disappears and then gradually re-emerges. The SPID responsible for the blocking always has the following features: WAIT TYPE = ASYNC_NETWORK_IO The SQL being run is “(@claimid varchar(15))SELECT claimid, enrollid, status, orgclaimid, resubclaimid, primaryclaimid FROM claim WHERE primaryclaimid = @claimid AND primaryclaimid < claimid)”. This is relatively innocuous SQL that should only return one or two records, not a large dataset. NO OTHER SQL statements have been implicated in the blocking, only this SQL statement. This is parameterized SQL for which an execution plan is cached in sys.dm_exec_cached_plans. This SPID has an object-level S lock on the claim table, so all UPDATEs/INSERTs to the claim table are also blocked. HOST ID varies. Different web servers are responsible for the blocking sessions. E.g., sometimes we trace back to web server 1, sometimes web server 2. When we trace back to the web server implicated in the blocking, we see the following: There is always some sort of application related error in the Event Log on the web server, linked to the Host ID and Host Process ID from the SQL Session. The error messages vary, usually some sort of SystemOutofMemory. (These error messages seem to be similar to error messages that we have seen in the past without such dramatic consequences. We think was happening before, but didn’t lead to blocking. Why now?) No known problems with the network adapters on either the web servers or the SQL server. (In any event the record set returned by the offending query would be small.) Things ruled out: Indexes are regularly defragmented. Statistics regularly updated. Increased sample size of statistics on claim.primaryclaimid. Forced recompilation of the cached execution plan. Created a compound index with primaryclaimid, claimid. No networking problems. No known issues on the web server. No changes to application software on web servers. We hypothesize that the chain of events goes something like this: Web server process submits SQL above. SQL server executes the SQL, during which it acquires a lock on the claim table. Web server process gets an error and dies. SQL server session is hung waiting for the web server process to read the data set. SQL Server sessions that need to get X locks on parts of the claim table (anyone processing claims) are blocked by the lock on the claim table and remain blocked until they all hit the application time out. Any suggestions for troubleshooting while waiting for the vendor's assistance would be most welcome. Is there a way to force SQL Server to lock at the row/page level for this particular SQL statement only? Is there a way to set a threshold on ASYNC_NETWORK_IO waits only?

    Read the article

  • Using ROWLOCK in an INSERT statement (MS SQL)

    - by RPS
    Would it be wise to use ROWLOCK on an insert statement that is copying large amounts of data and inserting it into the same table? Ex) INSERT INTO TABLE with (rowlock) (id, name) select newid, name) from TABLE with (nolock) where id = 1 Does anybody have recommendations on how to improve this statement, as I see when MS SQL gets busy it will end in Timeout Query returned for MS SQL.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Merge statement issue

    - by George2
    Hello everyone, I am learning and using SQL Server 2008 new Merge statement, merge statement will compare/operate source table and destination table row by row ("operate" I mean operations performed for when matched or not-matched conditions). My question is whether the whole merge process will be one transaction or each row comparison/operation will be one transaction? Appreciate if any document to prove it. thanks in advance, George

    Read the article

  • LINQ version of SQL's LIKE statement

    - by Erwin
    Hi fellow coders I'm new at LINQ, searching the net for LINQ samples that mimic SQL's LIKE statement doesn't satisfy myself. What I want is producing the same query result as this SQL SELECT * FROM table_1 WHERE column_1 LIKE '__0%' I want to query from table_1 where column_1's third character is '0' Is there equivalent statement in LINQ :D thank you

    Read the article

  • Show child and parent together using CONNECT BY Sql statement

    - by martilyo
    I have an sql statement that currently is just returning all the end parent rows for a list of child rows: SELECT DISTINCT row FROM table heirarchy WHERE parent_row = NULL CONNECT BY nocycle PRIOR parent_row = row START WITH row IN (select statement returning child rows) Is there a way to show the child and its corresponding parent together in the same result set using a modified version of my sql? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • What's wrong with this UPDATE FROM using a case statement?

    - by Blankman
    update p set p.storePrice = CASE WHEN p.costPrice BETWEEN 0.00 AND 1.00 THEN p.costPrice * 1.0 CASE WHEN p.costPrice BETWEEN 0.00 AND 1.00 THEN p.costPrice * 1.0 ELSE p.msrpPrice END FROM product p WHERE p.type = 1 The error says: Msg 156, Level 15, State 1, Line 9 Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'CASE'. I can't seem to see any issue with the sql?

    Read the article

  • SQL Cluster on Hyper V Failover Cluster

    - by Chris W
    We have a VM running SQL Server on a 6 node cluster of blades. The VM's data files are stored a SAN attached using a direct iSCSI connection. As this SQL server will be running a number of important databases we're debating whether we should be clustering the SQL Server or will the fact that the VM is running in the cluster itself sufficient to give us high availability. I'm used to running SQL clusters when dealing with physical servers but I'm a bit sketchy on what is best practice when all the servers are just VMs sat on Hyper V. If a blade running the VM fails I presume the VM will be started up on another load. I'm guessing the only benefit that adding a SQL cluster to the setup will give us it that the recovery time after a failure will be a little quicker? Are there any other benefits?

    Read the article

  • User Provisioning Tool for SQL Server 2008?

    - by Rob Sanders
    Yesterday I moved my machine from one domain to another - foolishly forgetting the implications for my local instance of SQL Server! Mixed Mode authentication is not enabled, and the only local account login has only "public" permissions. SQL Server 2005 Service Pack 2 had a tool called the User Provisioning Tool for Windows Vista (sqlprov.exe) which allowed you to add Domain Users to a local SQL 2005 instance (it doesn't work against SQL 2008 btw) - my question is.. is there a similar tool for SQL Server 2008 or am I going to have to do a reinstall? Also let me know if you think this belongs on StackOverflow

    Read the article

  • SQL Server crashes when remote query fails

    - by Hemanshu Bhojak
    Setup: I have a linked server setup on SQL Server 2005 which is pointing to an Oracle DB. The linked server has RPC enabled. Problem: When a query throws an exception on the remote server (Oracle DB) the SQL Server instance crashes. The logs say that the crash was due to some problem with the RPC call. Is there a way in which I can prevent the entire server to collapse but also use RPC over my linked server. EDIT: Event Log SQL Server is terminating because of fatal exception c0000005. This error may be caused by an unhandled Win32 or C++ exception, or by an access violation encountered during exception handling. Check the SQL error log for any related stack dumps or messages. This exception forces SQL Server to shutdown. To recover from this error, restart the server (unless SQLAgent is configured to auto restart). For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server crashes when remote query fails

    - by Hemanshu Bhojak
    Setup: I have a linked server setup on SQL Server 2005 which is pointing to an Oracle DB. The linked server has RPC enabled. Problem: When a query throws an exception on the remote server (Oracle DB) the SQL Server instance crashes. The logs say that the crash was due to some problem with the RPC call. Is there a way in which I can prevent the entire server to collapse but also use RPC over my linked server. EDIT: Event Log SQL Server is terminating because of fatal exception c0000005. This error may be caused by an unhandled Win32 or C++ exception, or by an access violation encountered during exception handling. Check the SQL error log for any related stack dumps or messages. This exception forces SQL Server to shutdown. To recover from this error, restart the server (unless SQLAgent is configured to auto restart). For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153  | Next Page >