I added SP2 to my 2005 server and now I can't connect to a previously working
linked Oracle server. I get this:
TITLE: Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio
"The test connection to the linked server failed."
Cannot initialize the data source object of OLE DB provider "MSDAORA" for
linked server "ISRSREPLICATEDLINK".
OLE DB provider "MSDAORA" for linked server "ISRSREPLICATEDLINK" returned
message "Error while trying to retrieve text for error ORA-01019
". (Microsoft SQL Server, Error: 7303)
What could have changed? Testing the connection via the ODBC works but
inside of SQL MAnagement Studio it fails.
Also somewhere in troubleshooting this I saw an error about unable to
allocate user side memory.
"TLuebke" wrote:
> I added SP2 to my 2005 server and now I can't connect to a previously working
> linked Oracle server. I get this:
> TITLE: Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio
> --
> "The test connection to the linked server failed."
> Cannot initialize the data source object of OLE DB provider "MSDAORA" for
> linked server "ISRSREPLICATEDLINK".
> OLE DB provider "MSDAORA" for linked server "ISRSREPLICATEDLINK" returned
> message "Error while trying to retrieve text for error ORA-01019
> ". (Microsoft SQL Server, Error: 7303)
> What could have changed? Testing the connection via the ODBC works but
> inside of SQL MAnagement Studio it fails.
>
>
|||TLuebke,
Have you tried reinstalling your Oracle provider? I did some research, but
no clear indication of what your problem is. One interesting thing is that
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb332055.aspx suggests using the
Oracle provider for OLE DB (OraOLEDB.Oracle.1) rather than MSDAORA, in case
that is useful to you.
RLF
"TLuebke" <TLuebke@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:57778530-E08D-46F2-ADD9-0D7D31236C74@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Also somewhere in troubleshooting this I saw an error about unable to
> allocate user side memory.
> "TLuebke" wrote:
Showing posts with label cant. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cant. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Thursday, March 8, 2012
add record in SQL
hi all, i hope to get some help from u guys. i want to add record to DB but it doesn't work, the record cant be added to db. i've a java clas like below:
public class CustomerDataBean {
private Connection connection;
private PreparedStatement addRecord, getRecords;
private PreparedStatement sqlFind;
// construct CustomerDataBean object
public CustomerDataBean() throws Exception
{
// load the Cloudscape driver
Class.forName( "COM.cloudscape.core.RmiJdbcDriver" );
// connect to the database
connection = DriverManager.getConnection(
"jdbc:rmi:jdbc:cloudscape:customers");
connection.setAutoCommit(false);
sqlFind = connection.prepareStatement(
"SELECT email, password " +
"FROM custinfor " +
"WHERE email = ? AND password = ? " );
getRecords =
connection.prepareStatement(
"SELECT * FROM custinfor"
);
addRecord = connection.prepareStatement(
"INSERT INTO custinfor (email, firstName, lastName, password, verify, address, phone, creditCard ) " +
"VALUES ( ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ? )" );
}
public void addCustomer( CustomerBean customer ) throws SQLException
{
addRecord.setString( 1, customer.getEmail() );
addRecord.setString( 2, customer.getFirstName() );
addRecord.setString( 3, customer.getLastName() );
addRecord.setString( 4, customer.getPwd() );
addRecord.setString( 5, customer.getVPwd() );
addRecord.setString( 6, customer.getAdd() );
addRecord.setString( 7, customer.getPhone() );
addRecord.setInt( 8, customer.getCC() );
addRecord.executeUpdate();
}
i called addCustomer method at JSP.
thanks.are you sure that the user name in your connection string that you are using has insert permissions to that table.
I know stupid, but I forget to give execute permissions to sp's all the time.
public class CustomerDataBean {
private Connection connection;
private PreparedStatement addRecord, getRecords;
private PreparedStatement sqlFind;
// construct CustomerDataBean object
public CustomerDataBean() throws Exception
{
// load the Cloudscape driver
Class.forName( "COM.cloudscape.core.RmiJdbcDriver" );
// connect to the database
connection = DriverManager.getConnection(
"jdbc:rmi:jdbc:cloudscape:customers");
connection.setAutoCommit(false);
sqlFind = connection.prepareStatement(
"SELECT email, password " +
"FROM custinfor " +
"WHERE email = ? AND password = ? " );
getRecords =
connection.prepareStatement(
"SELECT * FROM custinfor"
);
addRecord = connection.prepareStatement(
"INSERT INTO custinfor (email, firstName, lastName, password, verify, address, phone, creditCard ) " +
"VALUES ( ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ? )" );
}
public void addCustomer( CustomerBean customer ) throws SQLException
{
addRecord.setString( 1, customer.getEmail() );
addRecord.setString( 2, customer.getFirstName() );
addRecord.setString( 3, customer.getLastName() );
addRecord.setString( 4, customer.getPwd() );
addRecord.setString( 5, customer.getVPwd() );
addRecord.setString( 6, customer.getAdd() );
addRecord.setString( 7, customer.getPhone() );
addRecord.setInt( 8, customer.getCC() );
addRecord.executeUpdate();
}
i called addCustomer method at JSP.
thanks.are you sure that the user name in your connection string that you are using has insert permissions to that table.
I know stupid, but I forget to give execute permissions to sp's all the time.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Add new primary key column for replicated table with pull subscrip
I need to add a new column to a replicated table. But in my case a new column should be a part of a primary key. So, I can't use sp_repladdcolumn procedure since we need to completely repopulate the whole table and there is no default value for a new colu
mn. In addition to that this column should be first in the table's columns list, not the last one what happens when you usually alter the table adding a new column.
More there, I have a pull subscription and it looks like there is no way to drop subscription for a specified article only, like it is possible for a push subscription. I would appreciate any help pointing to an easiest way to add a new primary key column
for a replicated table with pull subscription.
TIA
Libra,
ordinarily you should be able to use sp_droparticle, sp_addarticle and
sp_refreshsubscriptions however to add the new column in a specific position
you'll need to drop the published article then recreate it and resubscribe.
You might use a nosync subscription to make things easier if the snapshot is
particularly large, but this will have restrictions if you later want to add
an article or column, so I'd recommend initializing with the complete
snapshot as per usual.
HTH,
Paul Ibison
(BTW no doubt you have seen other threads on this but placing columns in a
particular order is not generally considered 'good form' as TSQL should
ideally use explicit column names rather than rely on position.)
mn. In addition to that this column should be first in the table's columns list, not the last one what happens when you usually alter the table adding a new column.
More there, I have a pull subscription and it looks like there is no way to drop subscription for a specified article only, like it is possible for a push subscription. I would appreciate any help pointing to an easiest way to add a new primary key column
for a replicated table with pull subscription.
TIA
Libra,
ordinarily you should be able to use sp_droparticle, sp_addarticle and
sp_refreshsubscriptions however to add the new column in a specific position
you'll need to drop the published article then recreate it and resubscribe.
You might use a nosync subscription to make things easier if the snapshot is
particularly large, but this will have restrictions if you later want to add
an article or column, so I'd recommend initializing with the complete
snapshot as per usual.
HTH,
Paul Ibison
(BTW no doubt you have seen other threads on this but placing columns in a
particular order is not generally considered 'good form' as TSQL should
ideally use explicit column names rather than rely on position.)
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Add a table to a merge replicated database WITHOUT forcing a snapshot
Hello,
I've tried to catch up on all the posts in this area, and I can't really see
where this has been asked. If I have repeated a previous question, I do
apologize.
We are trying to add new tables to an existing merge replication by running
a create table statement on a publication database and then using
sp_addmergearticle with the @.creation_script parameter pointing to the sql
file to run on the subscriber as we are setting the identity fields
manually. When the procedure runs, it detects that the change requires a new
snapshot. We cannot afford the time it takes to create an entirely new
snapshot (could take days) so we are looking for the ways to speed up the
process.
We also tried to create tables directly by entering information into the
system tables but we have had trouble with generating insert, update and
delete triggers to replicate data.
We would like to know whether
1. There is a way to invalidate a snapshot for new tables only?
2. There is another way of creating new tables on a replicated
database.
Any help you could provide would be greatly appreciated! Thanks for your
assistance.
Sincerely,
Marshall
The standard ways to achieve this are:
(a) to create a new publication which contains the new table
(b) or to 'initialize' the table (by creating a complete snapshot)
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
|||Paul,
I guess that's the problem. Neither of these solutions is possible for us.
We are using Merge Replication in a high availability solution and cannot
afford to have the system down for the amount of time it will take to either
1. Generate a new publication with the additional requisite tables, or
2. Add the tables and generate a new snapshot.
What you have described are indeed the standard ways to accomplish the task,
however, due to our environment we really need to do something faster. We
are trying to create these additional tables in the same publication and
without the overhead of recreating the snapshot, which is totally
unnecessary except for the internal triggers required to keep the tables
synchronized (they are, after all, empty after they are created.) Isn't
there some way we could just create the triggers required for the new tables
and apply those to the subscriber? We're really looking for a solution that
takes less than thirty minutes!
Thanks in advance for any suggestions!
Marshall
|||Creation of new publication with one empty table in it should take much less than 30 minutes... If it's not a problem to have multiple publications, then it is the way to go.
Regards,
Kestutis Adomavicius
Consultant
UAB "Baltic Software Solutions"
"WideOpenWest" <MBCDev> wrote in message news:e6GdnTskHapNZPreRVn-jg@.wideopenwest.com...
Paul,
I guess that's the problem. Neither of these solutions is possible for us.
We are using Merge Replication in a high availability solution and cannot
afford to have the system down for the amount of time it will take to either
1. Generate a new publication with the additional requisite tables, or
2. Add the tables and generate a new snapshot.
What you have described are indeed the standard ways to accomplish the task,
however, due to our environment we really need to do something faster. We
are trying to create these additional tables in the same publication and
without the overhead of recreating the snapshot, which is totally
unnecessary except for the internal triggers required to keep the tables
synchronized (they are, after all, empty after they are created.) Isn't
there some way we could just create the triggers required for the new tables
and apply those to the subscriber? We're really looking for a solution that
takes less than thirty minutes!
Thanks in advance for any suggestions!
Marshall
|||I never thought of doing something like that; it would probably work, but it
is standard procedure for us to add tables when we do software releases.
After some time, we're going to have publication after publication, which is
ugly and probably a significant performance threat (each publication will
need its own agents.)
Is there some way we could use the information generated in the snapshot of
that new publication to add the tables to the original publication? Perhaps
this is not so orthidox, but we really need to find a solution to this
issue.
Another idea that has been suggested is to add several hundred generic,
empty tables to the new publication. Then, every time we need a new table
in a release we add the columns to one of those generic tables and begin
using it. The problem here is that we'd have several hundred generically
named tables! Is it possible to rename a table across a merge replication?
This is ugly also.
Help!
Thanks,
Marshall
"Kestutis Adomavicius" <kicker.lt@.noospaam_tut.by> wrote in message
news:%235KQnK63FHA.2424@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
Creation of new publication with one empty table in it should take much less
than 30 minutes... If it's not a problem to have multiple publications, then
it is the way to go.
Regards,
Kestutis Adomavicius
Consultant
UAB "Baltic Software Solutions"
"WideOpenWest" <MBCDev> wrote in message
news:e6GdnTskHapNZPreRVn-jg@.wideopenwest.com...
Paul,
I guess that's the problem. Neither of these solutions is possible for us.
We are using Merge Replication in a high availability solution and cannot
afford to have the system down for the amount of time it will take to either
1. Generate a new publication with the additional requisite tables, or
2. Add the tables and generate a new snapshot.
What you have described are indeed the standard ways to accomplish the task,
however, due to our environment we really need to do something faster. We
are trying to create these additional tables in the same publication and
without the overhead of recreating the snapshot, which is totally
unnecessary except for the internal triggers required to keep the tables
synchronized (they are, after all, empty after they are created.) Isn't
there some way we could just create the triggers required for the new tables
and apply those to the subscriber? We're really looking for a solution that
takes less than thirty minutes!
Thanks in advance for any suggestions!
Marshall
I've tried to catch up on all the posts in this area, and I can't really see
where this has been asked. If I have repeated a previous question, I do
apologize.
We are trying to add new tables to an existing merge replication by running
a create table statement on a publication database and then using
sp_addmergearticle with the @.creation_script parameter pointing to the sql
file to run on the subscriber as we are setting the identity fields
manually. When the procedure runs, it detects that the change requires a new
snapshot. We cannot afford the time it takes to create an entirely new
snapshot (could take days) so we are looking for the ways to speed up the
process.
We also tried to create tables directly by entering information into the
system tables but we have had trouble with generating insert, update and
delete triggers to replicate data.
We would like to know whether
1. There is a way to invalidate a snapshot for new tables only?
2. There is another way of creating new tables on a replicated
database.
Any help you could provide would be greatly appreciated! Thanks for your
assistance.
Sincerely,
Marshall
The standard ways to achieve this are:
(a) to create a new publication which contains the new table
(b) or to 'initialize' the table (by creating a complete snapshot)
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)
|||Paul,
I guess that's the problem. Neither of these solutions is possible for us.
We are using Merge Replication in a high availability solution and cannot
afford to have the system down for the amount of time it will take to either
1. Generate a new publication with the additional requisite tables, or
2. Add the tables and generate a new snapshot.
What you have described are indeed the standard ways to accomplish the task,
however, due to our environment we really need to do something faster. We
are trying to create these additional tables in the same publication and
without the overhead of recreating the snapshot, which is totally
unnecessary except for the internal triggers required to keep the tables
synchronized (they are, after all, empty after they are created.) Isn't
there some way we could just create the triggers required for the new tables
and apply those to the subscriber? We're really looking for a solution that
takes less than thirty minutes!
Thanks in advance for any suggestions!
Marshall
|||Creation of new publication with one empty table in it should take much less than 30 minutes... If it's not a problem to have multiple publications, then it is the way to go.
Regards,
Kestutis Adomavicius
Consultant
UAB "Baltic Software Solutions"
"WideOpenWest" <MBCDev> wrote in message news:e6GdnTskHapNZPreRVn-jg@.wideopenwest.com...
Paul,
I guess that's the problem. Neither of these solutions is possible for us.
We are using Merge Replication in a high availability solution and cannot
afford to have the system down for the amount of time it will take to either
1. Generate a new publication with the additional requisite tables, or
2. Add the tables and generate a new snapshot.
What you have described are indeed the standard ways to accomplish the task,
however, due to our environment we really need to do something faster. We
are trying to create these additional tables in the same publication and
without the overhead of recreating the snapshot, which is totally
unnecessary except for the internal triggers required to keep the tables
synchronized (they are, after all, empty after they are created.) Isn't
there some way we could just create the triggers required for the new tables
and apply those to the subscriber? We're really looking for a solution that
takes less than thirty minutes!
Thanks in advance for any suggestions!
Marshall
|||I never thought of doing something like that; it would probably work, but it
is standard procedure for us to add tables when we do software releases.
After some time, we're going to have publication after publication, which is
ugly and probably a significant performance threat (each publication will
need its own agents.)
Is there some way we could use the information generated in the snapshot of
that new publication to add the tables to the original publication? Perhaps
this is not so orthidox, but we really need to find a solution to this
issue.
Another idea that has been suggested is to add several hundred generic,
empty tables to the new publication. Then, every time we need a new table
in a release we add the columns to one of those generic tables and begin
using it. The problem here is that we'd have several hundred generically
named tables! Is it possible to rename a table across a merge replication?
This is ugly also.
Help!
Thanks,
Marshall
"Kestutis Adomavicius" <kicker.lt@.noospaam_tut.by> wrote in message
news:%235KQnK63FHA.2424@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
Creation of new publication with one empty table in it should take much less
than 30 minutes... If it's not a problem to have multiple publications, then
it is the way to go.
Regards,
Kestutis Adomavicius
Consultant
UAB "Baltic Software Solutions"
"WideOpenWest" <MBCDev> wrote in message
news:e6GdnTskHapNZPreRVn-jg@.wideopenwest.com...
Paul,
I guess that's the problem. Neither of these solutions is possible for us.
We are using Merge Replication in a high availability solution and cannot
afford to have the system down for the amount of time it will take to either
1. Generate a new publication with the additional requisite tables, or
2. Add the tables and generate a new snapshot.
What you have described are indeed the standard ways to accomplish the task,
however, due to our environment we really need to do something faster. We
are trying to create these additional tables in the same publication and
without the overhead of recreating the snapshot, which is totally
unnecessary except for the internal triggers required to keep the tables
synchronized (they are, after all, empty after they are created.) Isn't
there some way we could just create the triggers required for the new tables
and apply those to the subscriber? We're really looking for a solution that
takes less than thirty minutes!
Thanks in advance for any suggestions!
Marshall
Monday, February 13, 2012
Add A dynamic image value In Header Reports
Dear All,
i have a problem ,
In report header i add an image, we know that in header and footer i can't enter value like this "value=Fields!<Name>.value " and i can replace it with
"value =reportitems!<Name>.value " but and this didn't work exactly , it just work local or when i post the image from my computer like this/images/">"http://<computrname>/images/<image name>" but when write /images/">"http://<servercomputername>/images/<image name>" it doesn't work
Please Help
with my best regard
khalil hamad
Hi,
From your description, it seems that you want to add a image in your report, right?
You can include stored images in a report by specifying a URL to the image. When you use an external image in a report, the image source is set to External and the value for the image is the URL address to the image. For a report published to a report server configured for native mode, use a full or relative path. For example,/images/image1.jpg">http://<servername>/images/image1.jpg. For a report published to a report server configured in SharePoint integrated mode, use a fully qualified URL. For example,//Documents/images/image1.jpg">http://<SharePointservername>/<site>/Documents/images/image1.jpg.
For more information, see:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms156482.aspx
Thanks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)