Showing posts with label project. Show all posts
Showing posts with label project. Show all posts

Monday, March 26, 2012

How can i change security mode of SQL Server Express 2005

Hello,
I have created one application in visual studio 2005 and also created setup project of that application. now i want to install SQL Server Express edition with my application. so i have checked SQL Server Express 2005 in Setup Project Properities(Prerequisites...). now i want to change SQL Secirty Mode during setup. and i don't know how can we do this?

Any idia?

Thread moved to the appropriate forum|||

hi,

SQLExpress setup boostrapper accept "parameters" to define the "final" settings of the installed instance at install time..

the parameter you are looking for is SECURITYMODE=SQL to enable standard SQL Server authenticated connections..

please have a look at http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms144259.aspx for all supported parameters..

regards

|||

Thank for sujession, but still it is not work.
i have entered following line for change SQL Server Security Mode Windows Auth. To SQL Auth.

Start /wait setup.exe /qb INSTANCENAME=SQLEXPRESS SECURITYMODE=SQL SAPWD=pwd12345

i have also tried this :

Start /wait setup.exe /qb UPGRADE=Client_Components INSTANCENAME=SQLEXPRESS SECURITYMODE=SQL SAPWD=pwd12345

but still it is not work. i got the same error when i run my program "Login fail for user sa. The user is not associated with a trusted SQL Server connection.

|||

hi,

the exception is correctly related to not enabled SQL Server authenticated connections..

but the SECURITYMODE=SQL parameter is there for the case, and it "must" work as expected, as it really does since MSDE 2000 installer...

please pardon me, but are you sure you are later connecting to the correct SQLExpress instance?

regards

|||

Yes i connecting to correct SQLExpress instance.

but don't warry, it's solve now bcoz i directly change parameter in package.xml(Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\SDK\v2.0\BootStrapper\Packages\SqlExpress\en) file.

How can i change security mode of SQL Server Express 2005

Hello,
I have created one application in visual studio 2005 and also created setup project of that application. now i want to install SQL Server Express edition with my application. so i have checked SQL Server Express 2005 in Setup Project Properities(Prerequisites...). now i want to change SQL Secirty Mode during setup. and i don't know how can we do this?

Any idia?

Thread moved to the appropriate forum|||

hi,

SQLExpress setup boostrapper accept "parameters" to define the "final" settings of the installed instance at install time..

the parameter you are looking for is SECURITYMODE=SQL to enable standard SQL Server authenticated connections..

please have a look at http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms144259.aspx for all supported parameters..

regards

|||

Thank for sujession, but still it is not work.
i have entered following line for change SQL Server Security Mode Windows Auth. To SQL Auth.

Start /wait setup.exe /qb INSTANCENAME=SQLEXPRESS SECURITYMODE=SQL SAPWD=pwd12345

i have also tried this :

Start /wait setup.exe /qb UPGRADE=Client_Components INSTANCENAME=SQLEXPRESS SECURITYMODE=SQL SAPWD=pwd12345

but still it is not work. i got the same error when i run my program "Login fail for user sa. The user is not associated with a trusted SQL Server connection.

|||

hi,

the exception is correctly related to not enabled SQL Server authenticated connections..

but the SECURITYMODE=SQL parameter is there for the case, and it "must" work as expected, as it really does since MSDE 2000 installer...

please pardon me, but are you sure you are later connecting to the correct SQLExpress instance?

regards

|||

Yes i connecting to correct SQLExpress instance.

but don't warry, it's solve now bcoz i directly change parameter in package.xml(Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\SDK\v2.0\BootStrapper\Packages\SqlExpress\en) file.

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

How can I append only new rows in a table using SSIS?

Hi,

Im creatting an SSIS project that uses an Data Flow OLE DB Source to read data from an SQL Table and import it into a Destination table using Data Flow OLE DB Destination. but now everytime I run the project it appends all the rows not the new data rows only. How can I make the application so that it appends only the new data from a source table to a destination table. Is there maybe another Data Flow Control that can copy source table to destination and the next time it runs it only copy new rows. or any other way to do this using SSIS.

Your assistance will be highly appreciated.

Use the Lookup component. Set it up to return the keys of the destination table. Map the keys to your input data. Then grab the red arrow coming out of the lookup and hook it up to your destination.|||

Hi Phil,

Im new to SSIS, please bear with me. I have maped the lookup component to the destination table and hook the redline out of the lookup to destination OLE DB Destination which is also mapped to a destination table. It coppies all the rows.

Please email me the sample project, my email is sibu.khanyile@.enerserv.co.za

Thank you in advance

|||Make sure that you use a derived column to TRIM() the key fields going into the lookup component. Also know that the keys must have the same CaSE as those in the destination table in order to match.

Friday, March 9, 2012

How are you documenting your ETL processes

I'm currently using SSIS on a fairly large project. I wanted to know how
other developers are documenting their ETL processes. I've started using
Visio for flow charting some of my ETL processes. But I am finding it
difficult to use.
So, What tools/products are you using and are they working for you.
Thanks,
GHC.
(Feel free to post samples!)
Get Bi Documenter
http://www.bidocumenter.com/Public/Download.aspx

How are you documenting your ETL processes

I'm currently using SSIS on a fairly large project. I wanted to know how
other developers are documenting their ETL processes. I've started using
Visio for flow charting some of my ETL processes. But I am finding it
difficult to use.
So, What tools/products are you using and are they working for you.
Thanks,
GHC.
(Feel free to post samples!)Get Bi Documenter
http://www.bidocumenter.com/Public/Download.aspx

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

HOW "TOP" is interpreted?

All,
Not any project specific but just a beginner's query put me at
corner.
SELECT TOP 10 * FROM <TABLE_NAME>
Sqlserver2000 returns 10 results, but the question is "these 10 results
are top 10 results" means what? There are 100s columns in the table
with lacks of rows. Among them how this 10 results were ranked'
Any suggestions...?MUKUT (hidevraj@.gmail.com) writes:
> Not any project specific but just a beginner's query put me at
> corner.
> SELECT TOP 10 * FROM <TABLE_NAME>
> Sqlserver2000 returns 10 results, but the question is "these 10 results
> are top 10 results" means what? There are 100s columns in the table
> with lacks of rows. Among them how this 10 results were ranked'
As long as there is on ORDER BY clause, the answer is simply "the rows
that are cheapest for SQL Server to return". Thus, the result is not
deterministic, although it's neither random.
Normally you combine TOP with an ORDER BY in which case the ORDER BY clause
serves to give the TOP clause a deterministic meaning (save for ties, unless
you specify WITH TIES).
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodin...ions/books.mspx|||> SELECT TOP 10 * FROM <TABLE_NAME>
> Sqlserver2000 returns 10 results, but the question is "these 10 results
> are top 10 results" means what? There are 100s columns in the table
> with lacks of rows. Among them how this 10 results were ranked'
Always use ORDER BY with TOP:
SELECT TOP 10 * FROM <TABLE_NAME>
ORDER BY column (ASC / DESC)
Now you know waht top 10 means.
Dejan Sarka, SQL Server MVP
Mentor, www.SolidQualityLearning.com
Anything written in this message represents solely the point of view of the
sender.
This message does not imply endorsement from Solid Quality Learning, and it
does not represent the point of view of Solid Quality Learning or any other
person, company or institution mentioned in this message|||Erland Sommarskog wrote:
> As long as there is on ORDER BY clause, the answer is simply "the rows
> that are cheapest for SQL Server to return". Thus, the result is not
> deterministic, although it's neither random.
> Normally you combine TOP with an ORDER BY in which case the ORDER BY claus
e
> serves to give the TOP clause a deterministic meaning (save for ties, unle
ss
> you specify WITH TIES).
>
Ya, I understood the significance of using ORDER BY with TOP.........
No disrespect at all, but Erland, would you please brief on the
statement
"The result is not deterministic, although it's neither random."
I aware to guess... when there is no ORDER BY.. the results are
expected to be in random order.
And still I am that how sqlserver2000 interprets the
Select TOP 20 * from <TABLE_NAME>...!!!!|||> No disrespect at all, but Erland, would you please brief on the
> statement
> "The result is not deterministic, although it's neither random."
The first part states that you can execute the same query several times and
what rows you are
returned are not guaranteed in any way to be the same rows. The second part
states that SQL Server
doesn't add some random number generator to return rows in a random fashion.

> I aware to guess... when there is no ORDER BY.. the results are
> expected to be in random order.
No, not random. At least of you go by a strict definition of what random mea
n. What happen is that
you ask for, say, 10 rows. Any rows from the table, you don't care which row
s are returned. So, SQL
Server will pick an execution plan which is as cheap as possible to return 1
0 rows. This is why it
isn't deterministic, you can get different execution plans for different exe
cutions.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"MUKUT" <hidevraj@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149766325.373514.173190@.i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Erland Sommarskog wrote:
> Ya, I understood the significance of using ORDER BY with TOP.........
> No disrespect at all, but Erland, would you please brief on the
> statement
> "The result is not deterministic, although it's neither random."
> I aware to guess... when there is no ORDER BY.. the results are
> expected to be in random order.
> And still I am that how sqlserver2000 interprets the
> Select TOP 20 * from <TABLE_NAME>...!!!!
>|||> No, not random. At least of you go by a strict definition of what random
> mean. What happen is that you ask for, say, 10 rows. Any rows from the
> table, you don't care which rows are returned. So, SQL Server will pick an
> execution plan which is as cheap as possible to return 10 rows. This is
> why it isn't deterministic, you can get different execution plans for
> different executions.
The main problem is that, since you often get the SAME execution plan,
people think this is the intended behavior, and you will *always* get the
same execution plan. Which, of course, we know is not true. But it still
leaves a lot of people lazy, leaving out the ORDER BY clause, expecting it
to behave the same with or without it. Sorry for those people that have to
search and modify all their procedures with "TOP" when they migrate to SQL
Server 2005, which tends to "break" this behavior more often than not. :-)|||When there is no ORDER BY, the dictionary meaning of TOP is hampered by
the way sqlserver2000 behaves...:):)
Anyway, things are clear to me...thank you all for your time.|||> When there is no ORDER BY, the dictionary meaning of TOP is hampered by
> the way sqlserver2000 behaves...:):)
True. I've always thought they should have named it STOPAFTER...
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"MUKUT" <hidevraj@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149827146.025175.234160@.i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> When there is no ORDER BY, the dictionary meaning of TOP is hampered by
> the way sqlserver2000 behaves...:):)
> Anyway, things are clear to me...thank you all for your time.
>