|
hai all,
i have a table named 'applcn', it conatin near 100 field
i want to alter one column to not null
for that i use the folllowing query
alter table applcn alter column txtreforg3 nvarchar not null
but it show error like
Server: Msg 8152, Level 16, State 6, Line 1
String or binary data would be truncated.
The statement has been terminated.
how i slovw this???urgent
All I ever wanted is what others have....
CrazySanker
|
|
|
|
|
Hi i believe your statement
'alter table applcn alter column txtreforg3 nvarchar not null'
does not specify the column length which its will automatically give a default length value = 1 for txtreforg3 which you already has some data more than length = 1
So i suggest you make your statement
'alter table applcn alter column txtreforg3 nvarchar(x) not null'
x = depend the max length of your data in table. 
-C-?-M-
|
|
|
|
|
I have a MySQL 4.1 DB. When I am selecting from it by using ODBC driver instead of some russian characters I get only "???????? ??"
Default character set in DB is cp1251.
Is it possibly to set in Connection String which character set to use?
|
|
|
|
|
Monin D. wrote: I have a MySQL 4.1 DB. When I am selecting from it by using ODBC driver instead of some russian characters I get only "???????? ??"
Default character set in DB is cp1251.
Disclaimer,
I haven’t had to work with any language other than English.
I have noticed over the years that there are language specific ODBC drivers. Make sure you’re using the right ODBC driver for the language.
Good luck
|
|
|
|
|
Did you guys tried "Drilldown" feature in SQL Server 2005's "Reporting Services"? I implemented a report with drilldown - it works perfectly on Visual Studio 2003 Report Designer, I manage to build, render, view the report and toggle the "+" (and "-") to collapse/expand drilldown button.
However, when I tried to access the report via URL Access+Browser (IE):
http://localhost/reports/MySalesReports/sales_rpt1
Then drilldown stopped working. The "+" button is rendered, but when you click on it nothing happens. I am suspecting clientside/browser setting... anyone ran into this problem before?
Norman Fung
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, I'm investigating if it's possible to dynamically add column to selected report hosted by SQL Server's Reporting Service?
In my quest to resolve this problem I came across this article: http://www.codeproject.com/dotnet/DynamicReport.asp
Basically, the author's approach is to pass selected report a paratmer (plain old report parameter just like any other). The report toggle column property "visibility" of selected columns based on this parameter - but these columns needs to be defined ahead of time.
I'm looking for a way to truely dynamically add column to reports (rdl files loaded to Report Server). Thinking of further exploring Reporting Service Web Service Library - you can adjust web service properties, specify report paramters and retrieve report but it does not look like it will let you dynamically . Any idea? Thanks.
Norman Fung
REF:
MSDN - Reporting Services Web Services Library
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/RSPROG/htm/rsp_prog_soapapi_dev_3g0y.asp
|
|
|
|
|
folks,
The case is to induct the SQL Server 2005 into a huge code base product written primarily to work with SQL Server 2000 (for any reasons…).
Changing the code-base is not a good option due to the fatal impacts. The only option I see is to customize the existing ODBC driver which is for SQL Server 2000 to be intelligent enough to support for SQL server 2005 too.
What say? Does it sound realistic? Or does some one have insight in such case.?
Any guidance on it shall be helpful.
You have a good day.
-Ashu
- Ashutosh Bhatnagar
- Ashutosh Bhatnagar
|
|
|
|
|
Ashutosh Bhatnagar wrote: The only option I see is to customize the existing ODBC driver which is for SQL Server 2000 to be intelligent enough to support for SQL server 2005 too.
I don't think Microsoft will give you the source for their SQL 2000 ODBC driver.
What 'code-base' are you talking about ?
(C/C++/VB, or store procedures)
ODBC isolates your code (C/C++/VB/...) from the database being used.
It shouldn't matter if you move to SQL 2005 or even (that much) if you move to Oracle or DB2 or ...
Aside from all that, SQL 2005 is likely backward compatible with your SQL 2000 'code-base'.
Can you give an example of what you think you need to change ?
...cmk
Save the whales - collect the whole set
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
I am experiencing a problem while running two stored procedures manipulating same table.
While SP1 is performing some updation and SP2 tries to read, even SP2 is reading it waits until SP1 gets completed.
I have really no idea whats happening.
Kindly need your feedback.
thanks.
The Phantom.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi guys, trying to access Reporting Service:
http://localhost/reports
Ran into this: "The underlying connection was closed: The remote name could not be resolved."
Any idea? Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
i have a problem after i insert some records using insert into when i use select * , the records appear sorted with different order than i enterd it.
|
|
|
|
|
Of course not. SQL Server, or any other datbase for that matter, doesn't sort records in the physical table. It's too much of a performance hit for very little gain. Records are only sorted upon request, such as in your SELECT statement.
SELECT * FROM table ORDER BY fieldName
RageInTheMachine9532
"...a pungent, ghastly, stinky piece of cheese!" -- The Roaming Gnome
|
|
|
|
|
but the scenario done as
in insert phase i entered as follow:
256
512
1024
2048
in select phase when i select * i have that o/p:
1024
2048
256
512
do u have any explanation
|
|
|
|
|
It appears to be defaulting to an alpha sort on the string value.
How is the data stored (integers or strings)
What is the primary Key for the table?
Does it have a clustered index? (normally this would be the default sort order, since it dictates the physical organization of the data).
Is that column indexed (if so, how)
All of the above can impact the default sort order for "select *"
Absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power
Eric Hoffer
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
Edmund Burke
|
|
|
|
|
In addition to Rob's explanation I should also point out that the best way to think of the contents of a table are as a set. Sets are naturally unordered - they are just a collection of things. Even if I want it ordered by ascending primary key (the primary key is ususally the clustered index which is the thing that determines the physical order within the database) I always put an ORDER BY myPrimaryKey ASC because I take no guarantee that the functionality will remain or that someone else will come along after and optimise the database by moving the clustered index onto something else.
In short, if you want an ordered result set then specify the order. Otherwise treat the result as unordered (even if it appears otherwise)
ColinMackay.net
Scottish Developers are looking for speakers for user group sessions over the next few months. Do you want to know more?
|
|
|
|
|
thank u all for ur explanation, it helped my very much
|
|
|
|
|
Beolw is the tables Structure and dummy data used in Access database
Employee
========
EmpId(Pk int) EName(Text) DeptId(Fk int)
1 Rashid 1
2 Kashif 2
3 Black 1
4 White 2
5 Brown 2
Department
==========
DeptId(Pk int) DName(Text)
1 Labor
2 Secret
3 Production
4 Purchase
Attendance
==========
AttId(Pk Int) EmpId(Fk int) In/Out_Time(Datetime) Direction
1 2 2/5/2006 6:37:02 PM 1 // 1 for IN, 0 For OUT
2 2 2/5/2006 8:37:02 PM 0
3 2 2/5/2006 8:50:00 PM 1
4 1 2/5/2006 8:51:00 PM 1
5 1 2/5/2006 9:37:02 PM 0
6 2 2/5/2006 9:40:02 PM 0
7 3 2/5/2006 6:37:04 PM 1
8 4 2/5/2006 6:37:06 PM 1
9 5 2/5/2006 6:37:08 PM 1
10 5 2/5/2006 8:40:02 PM 0
11 4 2/5/2006 8:40:40 PM 0
12 3 2/5/2006 8:40:50 PM 0
13 2 3/5/2006 6:37:02 PM 1
14 2 3/5/2006 8:37:02 PM 0
15 2 3/5/2006 8:50:00 PM 1
16 1 3/5/2006 8:51:00 PM 1
17 1 3/5/2006 9:37:02 PM 0
18 2 3/5/2006 9:40:02 PM 0
19 3 3/5/2006 6:37:04 PM 1
20 4 3/5/2006 6:37:06 PM 1
21 5 3/5/2006 6:37:08 PM 1
22 5 3/5/2006 8:40:02 PM 0
23 4 3/5/2006 8:40:40 PM 0
24 3 3/5/2006 8:40:50 PM 0
And so on the attendance data for whole month.
What i need is an optimized efficient query that takes a Start_date(DateTime) as an input parameter and returns me the
Attendance data of all Employees for one week. Means starting from startdate and ending at startdate+6 days in the following
format
EName DName IstDay 2ndDay 3rdDay 4thDay 5thDay 6thDay 7thDay
Where as IstDay to 7thDay Columns contains the value for total Working hrs at that day as
IstDay = [{Value of In/Out_Time Column for Max(AttId) When Direction=0}-
{Value of In/Out_Time Column for Min(AttId) When Direction=1}
Where DatePart(d,In/Out_Time)=DatePart(d,@Start_Time) for any EMpId]
2ndDay = [{Value of In/Out_Time Column for Max(AttId) When Direction=0}-
{Value of In/Out_Time Column for Min(AttId) When Direction=1}
Where DatePart(d,In/Out_Time)=DatePart(d,@Start_Time+1 Day) for any EMpId]
3rdDay = [{Value of In/Out_Time Column for Max(AttId) When Direction=0}-
{Value of In/Out_Time Column for Min(AttId) When Direction=1}
Where DatePart(d,In/Out_Time)=DatePart(d,@Start_Time+2 Days) for any EMpId]
4thDay = [{Value of In/Out_Time Column for Max(AttId) When Direction=0}-
{Value of In/Out_Time Column for Min(AttId) When Direction=1}
Where DatePart(d,In/Out_Time)=DatePart(d,@Start_Time+3 days) for any EMpId]
And so on upto 7th day.
Now i m in need of an efficient query that returns me the required above result set.
NOTE
====
I am using Access 2000 database so i need a query or anything else that may give me the required output in Access database
Thnx in Advance
|
|
|
|
|
I have two tables that I have joined
First table is ExpenseReport and has a field in it called tboxBeginDate
Second table is called BeginDates and has a field in it also called tboxBeginDate.
I want to query and show only those dates in BeginDates that are not used in ExpensReport
Select ExpenseReport.tboxBeginDate, BeginDates.tboxBeginDate from BeginDates.tboxBeginDate RIGHT JOIN ON ExpenseReport.tboxBeginDate where BeginDats.tboxBeginDate != ExpenseReport.tboxBeginDate.
any help would be great thanks
Win32newb
"Programming is like Sex, make a mistake and you end up providing support for a long time"
|
|
|
|
|
Either of these should work. I prefer the first one for maintainability. If your tables are large the second one may be quicker with the correct indexes:
SELECT
tboxBeginDate
FROM
BeginDates
WHERE
tboxBeginDate NOT IN (SELECT DISTINCT
tboxBeginDate
FROM
ExpenseReport)
OR
SELECT
bd.tboxBeginDate
FROM
BeginDate bd
LEFT JOIN
ExpenseReport er
ON (bd.tboxBeginDate = er.tboxBeginDate)
WHERE
er.tboxBeginDate IS NULL
|
|
|
|
|
thanks a bunch you wouldn't happen to have a good place "tutorial" that will help you with sql other than w3schools would you?
thanks again
Win32newb
"Programming is like Sex, make a mistake and you end up providing support for a long time"
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know any really good sites. You may want to look at http://www.sqlservercentral.com[^]. Sign up for their newsletter and you will get a little dose of knowledge every day.
The book I learned the most from was written by Ken Henderson: The Guru's Guide to Transact-SQL. It was tough to grasp at first but, it really gives you confidence with the SQL language.
|
|
|
|
|
When I try both of your methods it ask me to enter a value for bd.tboxBeginDate I checked the database and this table has values so I'm not sure whats wrong must be something with the join statement 
Win32newb
"Programming is like Sex, make a mistake and you end up providing support for a long time"
|
|
|
|
|
I am guessing you are not using SQL server. Are you using Access?
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah unfortunately I'm using access for now. We will be converting to sql server soon but for now Access. Sorry I should have been more specific.
Win32newb
"Programming is like Sex, make a mistake and you end up providing support for a long time"
|
|
|
|
|
Access syntax is very different from SQL. The join syntax is really nasty when mulitple joins are involved. I used to write code that converted between the two but, that was many years ago. I think you can modify your original WHERE clause like this:
SELECT
ExpenseReport.tboxBeginDate,
BeginDates.tboxBeginDate
FROM
BeginDates.tboxBeginDate
LEFT JOIN ON
ExpenseReport.tboxBeginDate
WHERE
BeginDates.tboxBeginDate == ExpenseReport.tboxBeginDate AND
ExpenseReport.tboxBeginDate IS NULL
The 'IS NULL' is what I am not sure about. Create a new query and paste this into the SQL view of the query and see if it resolves correctly by going back to the design view. I can't remember how null is resolved in Access. It might be ISNULL([Field Name]) or something like that.
Do remember the following, when NULL is directly compared with a defined value:
BeginDats.tboxBeginDate != ExpenseReport.tboxBeginDate
Your result will be NULL not TRUE as you expected. That is why you would never get the correct result.
-- modified at 14:48 Friday 24th March, 2006
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
