|
Thanks for responding. I tried it with @ sign but it didn't work out too. I think something is wrong with SQL SERVER EXPRESS 2008 (may be related to a policy of something).
I am not an expert about SQL SERVER. If query is working fine but storedprocedures are not called, it means to me that the problem is related to SQL SERVER. I enabled CLR and it didn't work out too.
What a curious mind needs to discover knowledge is noting else than a pin-hole.
|
|
|
|
|
Since im not sure if im an expert or not, im not sure whether to answer. You may prefer to not limit yourself in future. you never know who might give you the right answer.
Just in case it helps, there appears to be nothing wrong with the extracts of code that you've posted. You certainly seem to have defined the SqlDataSource OK. Perhaps its something the control that is bound to this datasource is doing "under the hood" as it were. eg/ if you've bound to a DetailsView and you have a bunch of other fields bound to the datasource, it will try to turn them into parameters too.
|
|
|
|
|
J4amieC wrote: you never know who might give you the right answer.
You got my five.
I Love T-SQL
"Don't torture yourself,let the life to do it for you."
If my post helps you kindly save my time by voting my post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Management studio, modify the table definition and then select from the menu Table Designer / Generate Change Script... This gives you details what Management Studio is trying to do and possibly why.
I tested the same modification and it just added the column by altering the table, as expected.
The column to be added cannot be NOT NULL if default is not present at the same time so make sure that you define both when designing the table in Management Studio.
Mika
The need to optimize rises from a bad design
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm, must be me then...
I have testet this on two different database on the same server, with the same result.
I should say that the server is running SQL 2005 and as the headline indicates im using SQL Manager 2008
I know that the column being added may not be NOT NULL if the default value is not present, so thats not an ussue here.
well i guess i must look further, for this one...
but thanks for the reply Mika
With great code, comes great complexity, so keep it simple stupid... 
|
|
|
|
|
No problem...
I made a simple test with Management Studio 2008 against SQL Server 2005 Express Edition and still ok. Here's what was generated:
BEGIN TRANSACTION
GO
ALTER TABLE dbo.Test ADD
ToBeAdded nchar(10) NOT NULL CONSTRAINT DF_Test_ToBeAdded DEFAULT N'Some kind of value...'
GO
COMMIT
However I do have SP 2 on SQL 2005. Perhaps that would be the problem?
Mika
The need to optimize rises from a bad design
|
|
|
|
|
|
What I did in Management Studio was the following:
- selected the table from Object Explorer
- from Context menu for the selected table: "Design"
- added the necessary field and a default value for the field, but I didn't save
- then from the menu bar I selected "Table Designer" and then "Generate Change Script..."
- the code block in the previous post was copied from the dialog that opened
[Addition]
The build number for me is different: 9.00.3068.00 so I take it there are some differences in the engine.
[/Addition]
Hope this helps,
Mika
The need to optimize rises from a bad design
modified on Wednesday, September 24, 2008 3:45 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Ahh ok im with you, i found it... But now you are going to laugh, when i select the "Generate Change Script" the absolute same error box pops up.
heres the full error code:
Saving changes is not permitted. The changes you have made require the following tables to be dropped and re-created.
You have either made changes to a table that can't be re-created or enabled the option Prevent saving changes that require the table to be re-created.
With great code, comes great complexity, so keep it simple stupid...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actually I cannot laugh because it would wake up the children... 
But seriously, have a look at this Save (Not Permitted) Dialog Box[^]
Could the first bullet be the reason?
Also did you notice my modification about the build number in the previous post
The need to optimize rises from a bad design
|
|
|
|
|
hehe we found the same site... funny... thanks..
To work around this error do the following:
To change this option, on the Tools menu, click Options, expand Designers, and then click Table and Database Designers.
Select or clear the Prevent saving changes that require the table to be re-created check box.
With great code, comes great complexity, so keep it simple stupid...
|
|
|
|
|
You're welcome
Mika
P.s. Just a tip: Downvoting on some people may cause that they don't want to help any further
The need to optimize rises from a bad design
|
|
|
|
|
Downvoting ??? i didnt... i set the first answer to "Did not help"...
With great code, comes great complexity, so keep it simple stupid...
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, I have Picture object in .NET, I need to save it in Direct Text based query like,
"update table set picimage = " & ObjectName & " WHERE code = '111'"
What is the way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
hi all,
I want to open my back up database into other client systems.
Clearly I did one of my database into back up...that back up file open into others systems .
|
|
|
|
|
I am having kinda the same problem as the one already mentioned here:
Connection Pooling nightmare[^]
This is what's happening for me. Suppose that I've got a connection pool with minimum size of 10 and maximum size of 50. I'm monitoring the connections to database using SP_WHO stored procedure as well. When the first request is made to the web site, I can see that 10 connections are created in the pool. The thing that is confusing me is that by making a few subsequent requests, new connections are added to the pool even though all of 10 initial connections are in 'sleeping' mode and 'AWAITING COMMAND' as executing SP_WHO tells me. By executing subsequent calls to database the size of pool grows until it reaches the maximum number of connections (say 50). From this point on, any attempt for connecting to database results in the following exception:
DAL:Timeout expired. The timeout period elapsed prior to obtaining a connection from the pool.
This may have occurred because all pooled connections were in use and max pool size was reached.
This is happening while there are 50 connections in the pool whose status is 'sleeping' and AWAITING COMMAND.
I'm using Microsoft Enterprise Library (which I think automatically handles closing connections for me), and wherever I use DataReader, I am closing it in a finally block.
Am I missing something? Please somebody help me!
_
|
|
|
|
|
Are you using your own connection pool or the built in connection pooling (that happens transparently)?
Are you connecting using multiple SQL accounts (this will prevent connections being used by multiple accounts).
Are you disposing of all resources?
Are you actually using any of the features of the EL? (Apart from ExecuteDataSet).
|
|
|
|
|
I think I've found the problem. One of the data access functions was acquiring a DataReader without closing it. I don't know why I hadn't see it so far 
Thanks for your help though ![Rose | [Rose]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/rose.gif)
_
|
|
|
|
|
Are you certain the connection strings are identical - even the case of individual letters matters. ANY difference will cause a new connection.
Bob
Ashfield Consultants Ltd
|
|
|
|
|
I think I've found the problem. One of the data access functions was acquiring a DataReader without closing it. I don't know why I hadn't see it so far
Thanks for your help though
_
|
|
|
|
|
table
id val
1 11
2 22
3 33
4 44
6 55
Take MA3 for example, I wrote one, but not fast enough for draw the MA line, here it is:
SELECT a.id,ma=CASE WHEN a<2 THEN NULL ELSE AVG(b.val) END
FROM table a,table b WHERE b.id BETWEEN a.id-2 AND a.id GROUP BY a.id
Thanks in advance.
More local variables mean higher cohensive
Less function parameters mean looser coupling
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all..
I have an application which is having 2 servers.
client is having his own server and we are maintaining another server for online transactions.
when internet connection fails at client side,client is allowed to perform transaction at his place and we need to synchronize the database of both client side and server side when connection gets active.
can you one give me suggestions...
if the post is not clear.. i will give you in details..
Thankyou...
siri
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
