Search Results

Search found 99646 results on 3986 pages for 'sql server 2005 tempdb'.

Page 167/3986 | < Previous Page | 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174  | Next Page >

  • Can I modify package.xml file in SQL bootstrapper to install a named SQL server instance

    - by jonmiddleton
    I want to use the SqlExpress2008 Bootstrapper for a new installation on Windows7, I do not want to use the default SQLEXPRESS Instance. I have attempted to edit the package.xml file located in: C:\Program Files\Microsoft SDKs\Windows\v7.0A\Bootstrapper\Packages\SqlExpress2008\en\package.xml and updated the command argument instancename=CUSTOMINSTANCE But unfortunately it still creates the default SQLEXPRESS not CUSTOMINSTANCE The wix tag is as follows: <sql:SqlDatabase Id="SqlDatabaseCore" ConfirmOverwrite="yes" ContinueOnError="no" CreateOnInstall="yes" CreateOnReinstall="no" CreateOnUninstall="no" Database="MyDatabase" DropOnInstall="no" DropOnReinstall="no" DropOnUninstall="no" Instance="[SQLINSTANCE]" Server="[SQLSERVER]"> <sql:SqlFileSpec Id="SqlFileSpecCore" Filename="[CommonAppDataFolder]MyCompany\Database\MyDatabase.mdf" Name="MyDatabase" /> <sql:SqlLogFileSpec Id="SqlLogFileSpecCore" Filename="[CommonAppDataFolder]MyCompany\Database\MyDatabase.ldf" Name="MyDatabaseLog" /> Is this the standard way to accomplish this?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Upgrade 'Developer > Enterprise'

    - by JD
    Hey guys, My company purchased Visual Studio Pro 2008 last year, which had a 'free' copy of SQL Server Developer, which I have been using for development. We are wanting to upgrade the copy of developer edition to enterprise (As we now want to use the server as a production server), and have purchased the licenses for this. Now... Morally we're in the clear... However does this comply with MS licensing T&C's? We have Developer installed how we want it, and don't really want to uninstall SQL Server Dev just to install SQL Server Ent. Is there a way to transfer the license key to our Enterprise key without having to reinstall? Thanks, JD

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Compact 'Data Directory' macro in Connection String - more info needed

    - by codeulike
    So, as described on this msdn page, when you define a Connection String for SQL Server Compact 3.5, you can use the "Data Directory" macro, like this: quote from this msdn page: Data Directory Support SQL Server Compact 3.5 now supports the Data Directory macro. This means that if you add the string |DataDirectory| (enclosed in pipe symbols) to a file path, it will resolve to the path of the database. For example, consider the connection string: "Data Source= c:\program files\MyApp\Mydb.sdf" When using Data Directory, you can instead use the following connection string: "Data Source = |DataDirectory|\Mydb.sdf" For more information, see How to: Deploy a SQL Server Compact 3.5 Database with an Application. However, the 'for more information' link on msdn doesn't actually give any more information. So my question is: How does the |Data Directory| macro translate at run time? For WinForm apps, it seems to just give the location of the executable. Or is it more complicated than that?

    Read the article

  • Question How to integrate SQL Server Express with VS C# Express

    - by paul
    I have just installed VS C# Express 2008 which includes SQL Server Express 2008. It all went ok and I can see VS C# and SQL Server in the list of installed products. When I start VS C# it looks fine but in the DB Explorer / Data Conection context menu the option 'Create new SQL Server Database' is disabled. I have uninstalled all VS products and reinstalled but the problem remains. Do I need to do anything else? Can anyone help? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Microsoft T-SQL to Oracle PL/SQL translation

    - by Michael Prewecki
    I've worked with T-SQL for years but i've just moved to an organisation that is going to require writing some Oracle stuff, probably just simple CRUD operations at least until I find my feet. I'm not going to be migrating databases from one to the other simply interacting with existing Oracle databases from an Application Development perspective. Is there are tool or utility available to easily translate T-SQL into PL/SQL, a keyword mapper is the sort of thing I'm looking for. P.S. I'm too lazy to RTFM, besides it's not going to be a big part of my role so I just want something to get me up to speed a little faster.

    Read the article

  • Manually inserting varbinary data into SQL Server

    - by Jeremy Jarrell
    Hi, We have a SQL Server table for user settings. Originally the settings were domain objects which had been serialized as XML into the table but we recently begun serializing them as binary. However, as part of our deployment process we statically pre-populate the table with predefined settings for our users. Originally, this was as simple as copying the XML from a customized database and pasting it into an INSERT statement that was ran after the database was built. However, since we've moved to storing the settings as binary data we can't get this to work. How can we extract binary data from a varbinary column in SQL Server and paste it into a static INSERT script? We only want to use SQL for this, we don't want to use any utilities. Thanks in advance, Jeremy

    Read the article

  • SQL Server version of MySQL's group_concat and escaped strings

    - by TheObserver
    I only have the Express versions of MS SQL Server 2008 and Visual Studio. Given that I can't create a SQL Server project and therefore CLR solutions are out of the question, I've attempted to use select col1, stuff( ( select ' ' + col2 from StrConcat t1 where t2.col1 = t1.col1 for xml path('') ),1,1,'') from StrConcat t2 group by col1 order by col1 to get a row concatenated col2. col2 is a varchar field with some control characters like & and \n. When it is concatenated with the above SQL, it appears to escape those control characters ie. & becomes & amp ; and \n becomes &#xOD, which is not what I want it to do. So, the question is, what black box magic is causing that to happen?

    Read the article

  • Client-side Replication for SQL Server?

    - by Mighty Z
    I'd like to have some degree of fault tolerance / redundancy with my SQL Server Express database. I know that if I upgrade to a pricier version of SQL Server, I can get "Replication" built in. But I'm wondering if anyone has experience in managing replication on the client side. As in, from my application: Every time I need to create, update or delete records from the database -- issue the statement to all n servers directly from the client side Every time I need to read, I can do so from one representative server (other schemes seem possible here, too). It seems like this logic could potentially be added directly to my Linq-To-SQL Data Context. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Parameterized SQL statements vs. very simple method

    - by Philipp G
    When I started to write the first SQL-Statements in my programs I felt quite comfortable with protecting myself against SQL-Injection with a very simple method that a colleague showed me. It replaced all single quotes with two single quotes. So for example there is a searchfield in which you can enter a customername to search in the customertable. If you would enter Peter's Barbershop The SELECT Statement would look like SELECT * FROM Customers WHERE Customername = 'Peter''s Barbershop' If now an attacker would insert this: ';DROP TABLE FOO; -- The statement would look like: SELECT * FROM Customers WHERE Customername = ''';DROP TABLE FOO;--' It would not drop any table, but search the customertable for the customername ';DROP TABLE FOO;-- which, I suppose, won't be found ;-) Now after a while of writing statements and protecting myself against SQL-Injection with this method, I read that many developers use parameterized statements, but I never read an article where "our" method was used. So definitely there is a good reason for it. What scenarios would parameterized statements cover but our method doesn't? What are the advantages of parameterized statements compared to our method? Thanks Philipp

    Read the article

  • What are the Pros & Cons of using SQL Azure for existing apps on dedicated servers

    - by Mark Redman
    We currently own our own servers, and rent a rack in a datacentre. Looking at the pricing, scalabilty and SLAs for Azure SQL, I am thinking that it might be viable to only use Azure SQL but continue to use our existing applications on our own servers in a datacentres. This will enable us to not worry about the database and its infrastructure so we can concentrate on building an application server farm with disk storeage for files etc. Our application is quite big and has various windows services and parts of it used unmanaged libraries that may not be feasible in the cloud, so probably coulnt have everything in the Azure cloud. The pros: Reduced Total Cost of ownership (no database servers, no sql server licenses) The Cons: I guess there would be overhead in the transfer of data between the Azure Cloud and our datacentre (ie cloud may be in US and datacentre is in the UK) but would this overhead be usable?

    Read the article

  • Sql server 2012 management studio is not showing me the Databasemail

    - by Sreejith
    I am trying to send mail through SQL server. But in my case when i expanded the SQL Server Logs i cannot find my Database mail. How can i do this Please help me guys. I tried so many ways for showing the database mail there.. i could get anything. Please help me guys. I tried the following codes too // To fix the run the following script: USE Master GO sp_configure 'show advanced options', 1 GO reconfigure with override GO sp_configure 'Database Mail XPs', 1 GO reconfigure GO sp_configure 'show advanced options', 0 GO Please find the below link to my snapshot of the SQL server 2012 management studio. I dont have Database mail there.. https://imageshack.com/i/f0xY6qH2p

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2008 automated database drop, create and fill

    - by lox
    For the database in my project I have a drop/create script for the database, a script for creating tables and SPs and an Access 2003 .mdb file with some exported values. To set up the database from scratch I can use my SQL management studio to first run one script, then the other and lastly manually run the sort of tedious import task. But I would like to do this as automated as possible. Hopefully something like putting the three files in a folder along with a fourth script to execute. Looking something like: run script "dropcreate.sql" run script "createtables.sql" import "values.mdb" How is this done? I hope to avoid using SSIS and the like. The tricky this is of course the import of data, where I can't seem to find a simple way. It is also important that the files a left as they are and not embedded into anything.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Efficiently dropping a group of rows with millions and millions of rows

    - by Net Citizen
    I recently asked this question: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2519183/ms-sql-share-identity-seed-amongst-tables (Many people wondered why) I have the following layout of a table: Table: Stars starId bigint categoryId bigint starname varchar(200) But my problem is that I have millions and millions of rows. So when I want to delete stars from the table Stars it is too intense on SQL Server. I cannot use built in partitioning for 2005+ because I do not have an enterprise license. When I do delete though, I always delete a whole category Id at a time. I thought of doing a design like this: Table: Star_1 starId bigint CategoryId bigint constaint rock=1 starname varchar(200) Table: Star_2 starId bigint CategoryId bigint constaint rock=2 starname varchar(200) In this way I can delete a whole category and hence millions of rows in O(1) by doing a simple drop table. My question is, is it a problem to have hundreds of thousands of tables in your SQL Server? The drop in O(1) is extremely desirable to me. Maybe there's a completely different solution I'm not thinking of?

    Read the article

  • How do I create queries to SQL Server tables via Visual Studio when no knowledge about SQL nor Linq?

    - by Kent S. Clarkson
    Let´s be frank, my knowledge regarding SQL language is very low. Nevertheless, my boss gave me the task to build a database application using the following tools: SQL Server and Visual Studio 2008; C#. I use the VS DataSet as a local mirror of the SQL Server. And let´s be frank again, my understanding of the VS Query builder is also very small, I´m finding it quite confusing, actually. So no help to find from Query builder. And my knowledge of Linq is even lower... Perhaps I should mention that the deadline for the project is "aggressively" set, so I have no chance to learn enough about these things during the project. And I´m a bit stupid too, which is no help when it comes to challenges like this (on other occations it might be quite useful though) With these permissions, what should I do (except for killing myself or retire) to be able to query my tables in a sufficient way?

    Read the article

  • Case insensitive string compare in LINQ-to-SQL

    - by BlueMonkMN
    I've read that it's unwise to use ToUpper and ToLower to perform case-insensitive string comparisons, but I see no alternative when it comes to LINQ-to-SQL. The ignoreCase and CompareOptions arguments of String.Compare are ignored by LINQ-to-SQL (if you're using a case-sensitive database, you get a case-sensitive comparison even if you ask for a case-insensitive comparison). Is ToLower or ToUpper the best option here? Is one better than the other? I thought I read somewhere that ToUpper was better, but I don't know if that applies here. (I'm doing a lot of code reviews and everyone is using ToLower.) Dim s = From row In context.Table Where String.Compare(row.Name, "test", StringComparison.InvariantCultureIgnoreCase) = 0 This translates to an SQL query that simply compares row.Name with "test" and will not return "Test" and "TEST" on a case-sensitive database.

    Read the article

  • How can I search for numbers in a varchar column

    - by dave
    I've got a simple nvarchar(25) column in an SQL database table. Most of the time, this field should contain alphanumeric text. However, due to operator error, there are many instances where it contains only a number. Can I do a simple search in SQL to identify these cases? That is, determine which rows in the table contain only digits in this column. As an extension, could I also search for those column values which contain only digits and a space and/or slash. In other languages (eg. Perl, Java) a regular expression would resolve this quickly and easily. But I haven't been able to find the equivalent in SQL.

    Read the article

  • IS NULL doesn't work as expected in SQL Server 2000 with no Service Pack on it

    - by user306825
    The following batch executed on different instances of SQL Server 2000 illustrates the problem. select @@version create table a (a int) create table b (b int) insert into a(a) values (1) insert into a(a) values (2) insert into a(a) values (3) insert into b(b) values (1) insert into b(b) values (2) select * from a left outer join (select 1 as test, b from b) as j on j.b = a.a where j.test IS NULL drop table a drop table b Output 1: Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.194 (Intel X86) Aug 6 2000 00:57:48 Copyright (c) 1988-2000 Microsoft Corporation Developer Edition on Windows NT 6.1 (Build 7600: ) (1 row(s) affected) (1 row(s) affected) (1 row(s) affected) (1 row(s) affected) (1 row(s) affected) (1 row(s) affected) a test b ----------- ----------- ----------- (0 row(s) affected) Output 2: Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.2039 (Intel X86) May 3 2005 23:18:38 Copyright (c) 1988-2003 Microsoft Corporation Developer Edition on Windows NT 5.2 (Build 3790: Service Pack 2) (1 row(s) affected) (1 row(s) affected) (1 row(s) affected) (1 row(s) affected) (1 row(s) affected) (1 row(s) affected) a test b ----------- ----------- ----------- 3 NULL NULL (1 row(s) affected) If someone encounters the same problem - make sure you have the SP installed!

    Read the article

  • SQL Server indexed view matching of views with joins not working

    - by usr
    Does anyone have experience of when SQL Servr 2008 R2 is able to automatically match indexed view (also known as materialized views) that contain joins to a query? for example the view select dbo.Orders.Date, dbo.OrderDetails.ProductID from dbo.OrderDetails join dbo.Orders on dbo.OrderDetails.OrderID = dbo.Orders.ID cannot be automatically matched to the same exact query. When I select directly from this view ith (noexpand) I actually get a much faster query plan that does a scan on the clustered index of the indexed view. Can I get SQL Server to do this matching automatically? I have quite a few queries and views... I am on enterprise edition of SQL Server 2008 R2.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2008, not enough disk space

    - by snorlaks
    Hello, I'm executing sql query on my database. I have SQL Server 2008 installed on my D harddrive which has 55 GB free space. I have also C drive which has sth like 150 MB free (right now). While executing that query on quite a big table (16 GB) I have an error: An error occurred while executing batch. Error message is: Not enough disk space. I would like to know if there is any possibility that I can make SQL Server to use D drive instead of C Or maybe there is any other problem with what I'm doing ? Thanks for help

    Read the article

  • SQL - Joining multiple records to one record

    - by ho
    I've got a SQL Server database with the the following tables: Client (ClientID, ClientName) SalesAgent (AgentID, AgentName) Item (ItemID, Description) Purchase (PurchaseID, ClientID, Price) PurchaseSalesAgent (PurchaseID, AgentID) Each purchase is only ever one item to one client but there can have been multiple agents involved. I want to return the following list of columns: ClientName, Description, Price, Agents Where Agents is the names of all the agents involved in the purchase. Either as a comma separated list or as multiple columns with one agent in each. I'm looking for a way that's compatible with SQL Server 2000 but I'd also be interested in if there's a better way of doing it in SQL Server 2008.

    Read the article

  • SQL Not Exists in this Query - is it possible

    - by jason barry
    This is my script - it simply looks for the image file associated to a person record. Now the error will display if there is NO .jpg evident when the query runs. Msg 4860, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 Cannot bulk load. The file "C:\Dev\ClientServices\Defence\RAN\Shore\Config\Photos\002054.2009469432270600.001.jpg" does not exist. Is there a way to write this query to 'IF not exists then set id_number = '002054.2009469432270427.001' - so it wil always display this photo for any records without a picture. ALTER procedure [dbo].[as_ngn_sp_REP_PH108_photo] (@PMKEYS nvarchar(50)) AS ---exec [as_ngn_sp_REP_PH108_photo] '8550733' SET NOCOUNT ON DECLARE @PATH AS NVARCHAR(255) DECLARE @ID_NUMBER NVARCHAR(27) DECLARE @SQL AS NVARCHAR(MAX) EXEC DB_GET_DB_SETTING'STAFF PICTURE FILE LOCATION', 0, @PATH OUTPUT IF RIGHT(@PATH,1) <> '\' SET @PATH = @PATH + '\' SELECT @ID_NUMBER = ID_NUMBER FROM aView_person WHERE EXTRA_CODE_1 = @PMKEYS SET @PATH = @PATH + @ID_NUMBER + '.jpg' SET @SQL = 'SELECT ''Picture1'' [Picture], BulkColumn FROM OPENROWSET(Bulk ''' + REPLACE(@PATH,'''','''''') + ''', SINGLE_BLOB) AS RAN' EXEC SP_EXECUTESQL @SQL

    Read the article

  • Getting a permission error when trying to connect to sql database

    - by Matt
    I have a sql server on a dedicated machine, running SQL 2008. I have the IP of the box, a database setup on it. I've built a small script that just does a connection test, and when I run it, I get the following error. Request for the permission of type 'System.Data.SqlClient.SqlClientPermission, System.Data, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089' failed. I've been told by the admin that SQL remote access has been granted for my IP address. Anybody know what's wrong?

    Read the article

  • Composite primary keys in N-M relation or not?

    - by BerggreenDK
    Lets say we have 3 tables (actually I have 2 at the moment, but this example might illustrate the thought better): [Person] ID: int, primary key Name: nvarchar(xx) [Group] ID: int, primary key Name: nvarchar(xx) [Role] ID: int, primary key Name: nvarchar(xx) [PersonGroupRole] Person_ID: int, PRIMARY COMPOSITE OR NOT? Group_ID: int, PRIMARY COMPOSITE OR NOT? Role_ID: int, PRIMARY COMPOSITE OR NOT? Should any of the 3 ID's in the relation PersonGroupRole be marked as PRIMARY key or should they all 3 be combined into one composite?? whats the real benefit of doing it or not? I can join anyways as far as I know, so Person JOIN PersonGroupRole JOIN Group gives me which persons are in which Groups etc. I will be using LINQ/C#/.NET on top of SQL-express and SQL-server, so if there is any reasons regarding language/SQL that might make the choice more clear, thats the platform I ask about. Looking forward to see what answers pops up, as I have thought of these primary keys/indexes many times when making combined ones.

    Read the article

  • How to do a batch update?

    - by chobo2
    Hi I am wondering is there a way to do batch updating? I am using ms sql server 2005. I saw away with the sqlDataAdaptor but it seems like you have to first the select statement with it, then fill some dataset and make changes to dataset. Now I am using linq to sql to do the select so I want to try to keep it that way. However it is too slow to do massive updates. So is there away that I can keep my linq to sql(for the select part) but using something different to do the mass update? Thanks

    Read the article

  • sql server 2008, not enough disc space

    - by snorlaks
    Hello, Im executing sql query on my database. I have sql server 2008 installed on my D harddrive which has 55 GB free space. I have also C drive which has sth like 150 MB free (right now). While executing that query on quite a big table (16 GB) I have an error: An error occurred while executing batch. Error message is: Not enough disc space. I would like to know if there is any possibility that I can make Sql server to use D drive instead of C Or maybe there is any other problem with what Im doing ? Thanks for help

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174  | Next Page >