|
|
The following subquery returns 1024 records with a single count column. I am trying to return multiple columns with 1024 records. When I make changes to return multiple columns I get 17,000 records instead of 1024 records. I have very litle experience with subqueries. Does anyone have any suggestions?
SELECT IFNULL(COUNT(DISTINCT A.computerid),0) AS 'Machine Count',
A.hotfixID AS 'Last Contact'
FROM (SELECT HF.computerid, HF.hotfixID
FROM hotfixdata HFD
INNER JOIN hotfix HF
ON HF.hotfixid = HFD.hotfixid
AND HFD.ignore <> 1
LEFT OUTER JOIN Computers AS C
ON C.ComputerID=HF.ComputerID
WHERE INSTR(C.os,"microsoft")>0
AND HF.installed <> 1
AND HF.Approved = 1
GROUP BY HF.hotfixID, HF.ComputerID) A;
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have a class and the data in it has to be stored in the database. I have done this by extracting every single property and sending each of them as input parameters to a stored procedure in the database. But the thing is that the class has too many properties. Is there any way to accomplish this in a single go(lesser amount of code)? OH and I am using C# and Sql Server!
|
|
|
|
|
Presumably it throws an exception and posting that exception as part of your post is helpful.
Presuming that the exception is telling you the statement is too big...
If your SQL statement is too long then SQL/C# will have a problem with it. The solution is to reduce the size. (Might note that that could indicate a database design issue as well.)
Using the database import tools (sqlldr?) might help with the problem but might not. If not or you don't want to use it then solutions.
1. Do two calls.
2. Pass in a blob and parse it to create dynamic sql.
If it was me I would presume that there is a design issue.
|
|
|
|
|
As has been mentioned, if the table has too many field then there is probably a design problem.
Communication with the database is donkey work, most developers use or write a code generator for this. I have not hand coded DAL for many years.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
The thing is I am still new. Is it not good that we do more of the grunt work at the starting stages itself? And DAL coding is quite hectic. Sometimes I really feel why do we need it anyway. Thank you for eye opener atleast.
|
|
|
|
|
First, I am an absolute "database-beginner" 
Here is my szenario in my daily business-live:
I have a lot (~30) different datatables which I combine to produce usefull-information.
The main topics are:
a)
My datatables are stored in xml-files. The xml-files are actually generated by reading out information from other tools in my business
b)
For the "production of usefull information" (this is reporting) I use my own proprietary C#-Programs, where I perform "the logic". Means: Filtering, Joining, Combining,.....
c)
The final result is written into Excel-Sheets. The end-users use these excel-files for their needs
Here is my question:
Especially, step b, with my proprietary C#-Programs needs a lot of time for maintenance/updates/.... due to heavily changing environment. It is time-consuming to maintain it.
How do "professional database-engineers" handle such a task?. What is their approach? Which tools are they using?
modified 9-Nov-12 7:14am.
|
|
|
|
|
Search a topic like "Business Intelligence" and you will get an idea of what others are doing.
At a high level, you have a central database which collects data from different systems, then you have reporting tools which either you or your user community can write their own reports. Also, sometimes you can have these reports run on a scheduled basis and have their output delivered to whoever needs it.
The cost of implementing such a system can be quite high.
You might want to implement some pieces of this.
For example:
1) Build a tool which will load your data extracts (xml files) into a central database.
2) Create views or stored procedures which "normalize" your data
3) Use a reporting tool to generate the reports you need or show your users how they can connect to the central database via Excel to get their own data. (See topics like Microsoft Query)
Empower the user to access the data and you will spend less time on maintenance.
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
Frygreen wrote: My datatables are stored in xml-files. The xml-files are actually generated by reading out information from other tools in my business
This is just wrong - extracting data from other tools is valid, moving them to xml files is probably the worst platform to work from.
Get hold of sql server, use Express if cost is an issue (has a size limit of 4gb). Your current xml files can be loaded into tables in a sql sever database.
I would seriously think about getting someone to normalise and organise your data for you it is a non trivial job. Although if you have already done this with xml you may be able to handle it.
Use SQL Server Reporting Services SSRS to produce your canned reports (no analysis or drill down) and look into Integration Analysis Services for data analysis beyond the static reporting requirement.
I may sound SQL Server centric b/c I am, it is by far the best tool for departmental database processing. Don't piss about with Access or Excel go straight for the professional tools.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for your first replys. I got some ideas.
But, of course, more replys are welcome
|
|
|
|
|
we are using sql server 2008 in desktop application but client machine my database show i want database not show and secure my database please tell me what can i do.
thanks
badal
|
|
|
|
|
You can't "hide" your database, you need to apply authentication and authorisation to your database. This will limit what the user can see and do.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Best as I can tell from your question you are asking for something that is impossible.
SQL Server normally installs as an application. Thus it is ALWAYS visible on the client machine.
Now you could re-architect your application to use the embedded version of SQL Server (I think.) Then it would appear that only your application existed. I suspect this would require a bit of work. There are limitations to that approach.
Note as well that this has nothing to do with security. Security means something completely different.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
My sql expired and remove it completely from my hard drive.
Sql Server 2008 r2 how Registry files deleted. Where do I find these files.
My Windows 7.
Thank you. 
|
|
|
|
|
C:\users\Myusername\ntuser.dat and c:\Windows\System32\config\
<edit>You probably shouldn't remove these files.</edit>
People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.
|
|
|
|
|
Goto registry search for: 10.50.1600.1 by select F3.
|
|
|
|
|
I want to insert only one row in a table in SQL server 2008 using C# ADO.Net...
If any user want to insert another row in that table then it is not possible message should be display....
Please Just reply the Query & CODE....
|
|
|
|
|
Why have you repeated this question a third time?
One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.
|
|
|
|
|
M.T.H.Danish wrote: If any user want to insert another row in that table then it is not possible message should be display....
Please Just reply the Query & CODE....
A database does not display messages, it holds data. It holds data in bulk, not in "single records". What you want does not make much sense from a data-viewpoint.
Now, this is not the place to "order" code like you do. The questions on the forums are answered by volunteers, in their free time. Put it in a object, serialize it, and stuff it in a single-column blob.
|
|
|
|
|
I want to insert only one row in a table in SQL server 2008 using C# ADO.Net...
If any user want to insert another row in that table then it is not possible message should be display....
Please Just reply the Query & CODE....
|
|
|
|
|
M.T.H.Danish wrote: If any user want to insert another row in that table then it is not possible message should be display
Take a look at locking a table:
http://manuals.sybase.com/onlinebooks/group-as/asg1250e/sqlug/@Generic__BookTextView/55452[^]
M.T.H.Danish wrote: Please Just reply the Query & CODE
I didn't downvote you, but I think most people here won't like to do your work. You can ask questions, you can show your code and ask for help, but you have to do your work on your own. So my answer is:
Definitely not!
------------------------------
Author of Primary ROleplaying SysTem
How do I take my coffee? Black as midnight on a moonless night.
War doesn't determine who's right. War determines who's left.
|
|
|
|
|
I want to create a table in which only one row should be insert.
If any user want to insert another row in that table then it is not possible...
Please just reply query...
|
|
|
|
|
Try using something like:
select count(*) from MyTable
if (count = 0) then
do insert
else
fail
|
|
|
|
|
Why would you need a table with just 1 row?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
