Rowcounts don't appear

[reposted from the beta NG]

Hi,
I have a data-flow that, when I run it in the designer on its own, displays rowcounts in the GUI as data flows through the pipeline - as we would expect.

However, if I execute the package from another package (still from the designer), the rowcounts don't show anymore. Everything goes green/yellow/red as normal - just no rowcounts.

This is on IDW14. Haven't yet got IDW15 up and running.

Note that on the NG, Evan Black has confirmed he is seeing the same behaviour.

Regards
JamieHi,
I just want to reiterate the importance of this.

I am currently running a package that has so far been running for 2 hours. It is incredibly annoying that I cannot see how far through the execution it actually is.
I don't know what is going on with my package. All I know is that it is doing something thanks to task manager and the fact that, through Profiler, I can see it executing queries against SQL Server (because it contains a LOOKUP component).

I am trying to see if a change that I have made has made the package quicker or slower than yesterday. If I was able to to see rowcounts in the GUI I would be able to make a manual check of the throughput of the package. As it stands I can't do this and I'm pretty narked about it to say the least!

-Jamie|||With the Feb. CTP, I reported that I seemed to have a choice, when executing one DTS package from another, as to which dtsx package (of target) to target -- because each package has two dtsx files, one in the source directory and one in the bin directory:
#1)
Point the target of the connection at the dtsx package in the bin subdirectory
Advantage: Get coloring and everything when target is executed from caller
Disadvantage: Opens a new dtsx window in IDE, and if you edit it, all changes
will be silently discarded
#2)
Point the target of the connection at the dtsx package in the source directory
Advantage: (avoids disadvantage above, which leads to losing work and cursing)
Disadvantage: no coloring, so you wind up watching a screen where nothing happens for a long while, hoping that good things are really happening

This sounds somewhat related to what you're reporting.
|||Thanks Perry,
I always point at the version that ISN'T in the bin directory because as you say, any changes will be lost. Hence you should never point at the version in the bin directory. It is used by the runtime engine I think and should not be used by the developer.

I'm using the latest CTP. Colouring does occur when a package is executed from a parent, although not as readily as if a package is executed on its own. And we certainly don't get rowcounts.

So yes, this is a related issue. If I were you though I wuld not be touching the file in the bin directory!

-Jamiesql

row_number query

If i run the query
with test as
(select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
from table1)
select * from test order by cnt
Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?shahdha...@.gmail.com wrote:
> If i run the query
> with test as
> (select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
> from table1)
> select * from test order by cnt
> Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?
no, it is not guaranteed to be the same.|||No, you're ordering by a constant.
If you want to return the rows in an order that represents something in the
data, why don't you order by one of the data columns?
<shahdharti@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1150815893.641027.46750@.b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> If i run the query
> with test as
> (select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
> from table1)
> select * from test order by cnt
> Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?
>|||No. You use a function in the OVER clause for the ORDER BY which resolves to
the same value for
every row. This means that SQL Server can access the data in any way it find
s most efficient. In
short, the ROW_NUMBER function is not deterministic unless you specify a col
umn which is unique.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
<shahdharti@.gmail.com> wrote in message news:1150815893.641027.46750@.b68g2000cwa.googlegrou
ps.com...
> If i run the query
> with test as
> (select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
> from table1)
> select * from test order by cnt
> Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?
>|||<shahdharti@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1150815893.641027.46750@.b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> If i run the query
> with test as
> (select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
> from table1)
> select * from test order by cnt
> Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?
>
No. You get what you ask for. Add the key of Table1 to the OVER ORDER BY
clause and it will be fine.
David Portas, SQL Server MVP
Whenever possible please post enough code to reproduce your problem.
Including CREATE TABLE and INSERT statements usually helps.
State what version of SQL Server you are using and specify the content
of any error messages.
SQL Server Books Online:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/library/ms130214(en-US,SQL.90).aspx
--

row_number query

shahdha...@.gmail.com wrote:
> If i run the query
> with test as
> (select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
> from table1)
> select * from test order by cnt
> Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?
no, it is not guaranteed to be the same.No, you're ordering by a constant.
If you want to return the rows in an order that represents something in the
data, why don't you order by one of the data columns?
<shahdharti@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1150815893.641027.46750@.b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> If i run the query
> with test as
> (select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
> from table1)
> select * from test order by cnt
> Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?
>|||No. You use a function in the OVER clause for the ORDER BY which resolves to
the same value for
every row. This means that SQL Server can access the data in any way it find
s most efficient. In
short, the ROW_NUMBER function is not deterministic unless you specify a col
umn which is unique.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
<shahdharti@.gmail.com> wrote in message news:1150815893.641027.46750@.b68g2000cwa.googlegroup
s.com...
> If i run the query
> with test as
> (select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
> from table1)
> select * from test order by cnt
> Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?
>|||If i run the query
with test as
(select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
from table1)
select * from test order by cnt
Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?|||shahdha...@.gmail.com wrote:
> If i run the query
> with test as
> (select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
> from table1)
> select * from test order by cnt
> Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?
no, it is not guaranteed to be the same.|||No, you're ordering by a constant.
If you want to return the rows in an order that represents something in the
data, why don't you order by one of the data columns?
<shahdharti@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1150815893.641027.46750@.b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> If i run the query
> with test as
> (select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
> from table1)
> select * from test order by cnt
> Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?
>|||No. You use a function in the OVER clause for the ORDER BY which resolves to
the same value for
every row. This means that SQL Server can access the data in any way it find
s most efficient. In
short, the ROW_NUMBER function is not deterministic unless you specify a col
umn which is unique.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
<shahdharti@.gmail.com> wrote in message news:1150815893.641027.46750@.b68g2000cwa.googlegroup
s.com...
> If i run the query
> with test as
> (select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
> from table1)
> select * from test order by cnt
> Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?
>|||<shahdharti@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1150815893.641027.46750@.b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> If i run the query
> with test as
> (select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
> from table1)
> select * from test order by cnt
> Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?
>
No. You get what you ask for. Add the key of Table1 to the OVER ORDER BY
clause and it will be fine.
David Portas, SQL Server MVP
Whenever possible please post enough code to reproduce your problem.
Including CREATE TABLE and INSERT statements usually helps.
State what version of SQL Server you are using and specify the content
of any error messages.
SQL Server Books Online:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/library/ms130214(en-US,SQL.90).aspx
--|||<shahdharti@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1150815893.641027.46750@.b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> If i run the query
> with test as
> (select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
> from table1)
> select * from test order by cnt
> Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?
>
No. You get what you ask for. Add the key of Table1 to the OVER ORDER BY
clause and it will be fine.
David Portas, SQL Server MVP
Whenever possible please post enough code to reproduce your problem.
Including CREATE TABLE and INSERT statements usually helps.
State what version of SQL Server you are using and specify the content
of any error messages.
SQL Server Books Online:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/library/ms130214(en-US,SQL.90).aspx
--

row_number query

If i run the query
with test as
(select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
from table1)
select * from test order by cnt
Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?shahdha...@.gmail.com wrote:
> If i run the query
> with test as
> (select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
> from table1)
> select * from test order by cnt
> Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?
no, it is not guaranteed to be the same.|||No, you're ordering by a constant.
If you want to return the rows in an order that represents something in the
data, why don't you order by one of the data columns?
<shahdharti@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1150815893.641027.46750@.b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> If i run the query
> with test as
> (select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
> from table1)
> select * from test order by cnt
> Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?
>|||No. You use a function in the OVER clause for the ORDER BY which resolves to the same value for
every row. This means that SQL Server can access the data in any way it finds most efficient. In
short, the ROW_NUMBER function is not deterministic unless you specify a column which is unique.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
<shahdharti@.gmail.com> wrote in message news:1150815893.641027.46750@.b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> If i run the query
> with test as
> (select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
> from table1)
> select * from test order by cnt
> Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?
>|||<shahdharti@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1150815893.641027.46750@.b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> If i run the query
> with test as
> (select *, row_number() over (order by user_name()) as cnt
> from table1)
> select * from test order by cnt
> Will i always get rows in same order every time when I run the query?
>
No. You get what you ask for. Add the key of Table1 to the OVER ORDER BY
clause and it will be fine.
--
David Portas, SQL Server MVP
Whenever possible please post enough code to reproduce your problem.
Including CREATE TABLE and INSERT statements usually helps.
State what version of SQL Server you are using and specify the content
of any error messages.
SQL Server Books Online:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/library/ms130214(en-US,SQL.90).aspx
--

'ROW_NUMBER' is not a recognized function name.

Hi experts,
recently i download the SQLExpress 2005 version to do some testing,
when i try to run a new feature which all ROW_NUMBER, but SQL give me
error
'ROW_NUMBER' is not a recognized function name.
i wondering after install the 05, we need to add-on some package to
support this kind of feature,. which is not default '
* the sample is from
http://msdn.microsoft.com/sql/learn...tsqlenhance.asp
pls give advise, many thanksJust the routine check. I hope you are not connecting to a SQL Server 2000
instance from the SQL Srvr Management Studio express edition.|||Check your database compatibility level
exec sp_dbcmptlevel '<Name of db>'
HTH
Kalen Delaney, SQL Server MVP
"XJ" <ianyian@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1148698630.294392.99660@.g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Hi experts,
> recently i download the SQLExpress 2005 version to do some testing,
> when i try to run a new feature which all ROW_NUMBER, but SQL give me
> error
> 'ROW_NUMBER' is not a recognized function name.
> i wondering after install the 05, we need to add-on some package to
> support this kind of feature,. which is not default '
> * the sample is from
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/sql/learn...tsqlenhance.asp
> pls give advise, many thanks
>|||Hi Kalen,
i catch u, which give me 80, yes i agree that i have sql 2000
before, but i already uninstall it, rght now under the service name
call XJ\SQLEXPRESS.
and i have use "Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio Express",
but even i try to create a new DB, still give me 80,. pls give some
idea how can i create a DB which have 2005 feature under "studio
express" or any other way ,. .. many thanks|||Hi Kalen , Omnibuzz
Bcos the instance make me some confuse ,. finally i can
connect ! ya ,. many thanks !!!!

ROW_NUMBER and LEFT JOIN

Hi,

I don't have a problem, but I have run into an SQL 2005 "behavior" that I can't explain. So, I thought I'd ask here.

My question is how come that the below script will return 1 row if DISTINCT keyword is present and 3 rows if it's not? I would have guessed that it should return 3 rows for both versions of the batch.

Declare @.Movies TABLE(ID int,Namenvarchar(100))

Declare @.Comments TABLE(ID int, MovieID int, Comment nvarchar(100))

INSERTINTO @.Movies VALUES(1,'Pulp Fiction')

INSERTINTO @.Comments VALUES(1, 1,'Good movie.')

INSERTINTO @.Comments VALUES(2, 1,'Sucked!')

INSERTINTO @.Comments VALUES(3, 1,'Terrific.')

SELECT

DISTINCT

ROW_NUMBER()OVER(ORDERBY M.ID DESC)AS RowNum,

M.ID

FROM

@.Movies AS M

LEFTJOIN

@.Comments AS C

ON

C.MovieID = M.ID

GO

In the Execution Plan I can see that, if the keyword DISTINCT is present, SQL won't "touch" the Comments table, and if DISTINCT is present it will deal with the Comments table, so that gives me a clue, but I'd still like to hear an offical explanation if there is one.

Thanks.

Since you haven't included any columns from the @.Comments table, the "distinct" will cause the same number of rows to be returned with or without the left join to that table, so the query does not require access to @.Comments.

Ron Rice

Row Order on View Results

When I run a view on SQL 2005 the resulting rows are not in order, even if the SQL statement defining the view includes an order by clause.

Within the Microsoft SQL Manager Studio (SQL 2005), when the view is opened, the rows are in no specific order.

Records viewed remotely via ADO likewise are not displayed in order. Neither are records viewed via ODBC.

Interestingly, when opened in modify mode within the Microsoft SQL Manager Studio (SQL 2005), the view does display the records according to the ORDER BY clause.

On the other hand, the same view on SQL 2000 produces result sets organized according to the ORDER BY clause. This is true whether the view is opened normally or in design mode.

And records viewed remotely via ADO are displayed in order, as are records viewed via ODBC.

I find this disappointing and a stumbling block in moving databases out of SQL 2000 and into SQL 2005.

The Database that I used was one pulled into a SQL 2005 64 bit server out of a back up made by a SQL 2000 server of a SQL 2000 database.

In general it's not recommended to include an ORDER BY clause in a view. A view should define a new relation of attributes derived from existing attributes in the datamodel. A query using the view should apply an order by on the data represented by the view to produce an ordered resultset.

row level permissions

is there a simple procedure to run to find what the row level permissions are on each user?

thanks.

I am not clear with the requirement. There is no row level permission in sql server if its refering to Table rows. You can give table level permission or you can create views as per the conditions and give permission to views.

Madhu

|||I should clearify. I'm looing for table level permissions. I assume there is a simple procedure to run to find this information for each user.|||

Take a look at the INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TABLE_PRIVILEGES view. This might provide the detail you're looking for.

HTH!

|||

or you can use sp_helprotect /sys.database_permissions and fn_builtin_permissions to get the permission on objects.

Read about

SP_HELPROTECT/sys.database_permissions (sql server 2005) in BOL

Madhu

Row count on all tables in the database

Does anyone have a single T-SQL script that could be run against a database that would return the table name and row count for each table?

Code Snippet

declare @.cmd nvarchar(max)

set @.cmd=null

select @.cmd =coalesce(@.cmd +'; ','')+

N'SELECT COUNT(*) AS "'+

quotename(table_catalog)+ N'.'+

quotename(table_schema)+ N'.'+

quotename(table_name)+

N' Count" FROM '+quotename(table_catalog)+ N'.'+

quotename(table_schema)+ N'.'+

quotename(table_name)

frominformation_schema.tables

execsp_executesql @.cmd

|||

Alternate variation:

Code Snippet

declare @.cmd nvarchar(max)

set @.cmd=null

select @.cmd =coalesce(@.cmd +' union all ','')+

N'SELECT '''+

quotename(table_catalog)+ N'.'+

quotename(table_schema)+ N'.'+

quotename(table_name)+

N''' AS TableName, COUNT(*) AS "Rows" '+

N' FROM '+quotename(table_catalog)+ N'.'+

quotename(table_schema)+ N'.'+

quotename(table_name)

frominformation_schema.tables

execsp_executesql @.cmd

|||Thanks for the reply Dale. I get results when running this against my master database but not against my DSS database (which is the one I am really after). Is there a variation that would work for my DSS database?|||

The INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TABLES runs against the current database.

Issue USE DSS; in front of the rest of the code.

|||

A fair estimate can be get from:

-- 2000

use your_db

go

dbcc updateusage (0) withcount_rows

go

select

object_name([id]),

rowcnt

from

sysindexes

where

indid in(0, 1)

andobjectproperty([id],'IsUserTable')= 1

andobjectproperty([id],'IsMSShipped')= 0

go

-- 2005

select

object_name([object_id]),

sum([rows])as rowcnt

from

sys.partitions

where

objectproperty([object_id],'IsUserTable')= 1

andobjectproperty([object_id],'IsMSShipped')= 0

groupby

[object_id]

go

AMB

Rounding error when using UPDATE function

I am trying to discover the source of an error that occurs in some code
that I run regularly.
I have found a problem that when I try to update a table with a
calculated figure a rounding error occurs.
This problem can be shown by running the following code:
UPDATE NumericVal
SET ValExpected = 0.72139753801593054
WHERE NumericVal.ValItemCode = 2441 AND ValTPCode = 4159
SELECT ValExpected
FROM NumericVal
WHERE NumericVal.ValItemCode = 2441 AND ValTPCode = 4159
ValExpected returns the value 0.72139752, although it should be
identical to entered value which would round to 0.72139754.
I know it's only a small difference but it is causing greater errors in
later calculations.
Is there any explanation as to why this is happening and how can I
resolve the issue?What are the datatypes? Without knowing the datatypes all we an do is
speculate.
I speculate that you are using FLOAT, or REAL.
FLOAT and REAL are internally binary. They store data to the right of
the decimal point as binary fractions: 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, 1/32, etc.
Just as the decimal system can not accurately store 1/3, the binary
system can not store some numbers that store accurately in the decimal
system. This is why REAL and FLOAT are described in the documentation
as: "Approximate number data types for use with floating point numeric
data. Floating point data is approximate; not all values in the data
type range can be precisely represented."
Roy Harvey
Beacon Falls, CT
On 28 Jun 2006 04:49:50 -0700, "AdamHCC"
<adam.roberts@.healthcarecommission.org.uk> wrote:

>I am trying to discover the source of an error that occurs in some code
>that I run regularly.
>I have found a problem that when I try to update a table with a
>calculated figure a rounding error occurs.
>This problem can be shown by running the following code:
>UPDATE NumericVal
>SET ValExpected = 0.72139753801593054
>WHERE NumericVal.ValItemCode = 2441 AND ValTPCode = 4159
>SELECT ValExpected
>FROM NumericVal
>WHERE NumericVal.ValItemCode = 2441 AND ValTPCode = 4159
>
>ValExpected returns the value 0.72139752, although it should be
>identical to entered value which would round to 0.72139754.
>I know it's only a small difference but it is causing greater errors in
>later calculations.
>Is there any explanation as to why this is happening and how can I
>resolve the issue?|||Adam
ValExpected has a DECIMAL /FLOAT/REAL datatype ?
"AdamHCC" <adam.roberts@.healthcarecommission.org.uk> wrote in message
news:1151495390.107042.281570@.d56g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>I am trying to discover the source of an error that occurs in some code
> that I run regularly.
> I have found a problem that when I try to update a table with a
> calculated figure a rounding error occurs.
> This problem can be shown by running the following code:
> UPDATE NumericVal
> SET ValExpected = 0.72139753801593054
> WHERE NumericVal.ValItemCode = 2441 AND ValTPCode = 4159
> SELECT ValExpected
> FROM NumericVal
> WHERE NumericVal.ValItemCode = 2441 AND ValTPCode = 4159
>
> ValExpected returns the value 0.72139752, although it should be
> identical to entered value which would round to 0.72139754.
> I know it's only a small difference but it is causing greater errors in
> later calculations.
> Is there any explanation as to why this is happening and how can I
> resolve the issue?
>|||It looks like ValExpected is declared to be of type REAL, which has limited
precision. To preserve the exact value, use a DECIMAL type with appropriate
precision and scale, or to keep about 15-16 decimal places of accuracy and
allow a wider range, use FLOAT instead of REAL.
Steve Kass
Drew University
AdamHCC wrote:

>I am trying to discover the source of an error that occurs in some code
>that I run regularly.
>I have found a problem that when I try to update a table with a
>calculated figure a rounding error occurs.
>This problem can be shown by running the following code:
>UPDATE NumericVal
>SET ValExpected = 0.72139753801593054
>WHERE NumericVal.ValItemCode = 2441 AND ValTPCode = 4159
>SELECT ValExpected
>FROM NumericVal
>WHERE NumericVal.ValItemCode = 2441 AND ValTPCode = 4159
>
>ValExpected returns the value 0.72139752, although it should be
>identical to entered value which would round to 0.72139754.
>I know it's only a small difference but it is causing greater errors in
>later calculations.
>Is there any explanation as to why this is happening and how can I
>resolve the issue?
>
>|||ValExpected is declared as a real variable.
Why when storing the value would it store 0.72139752 rather than
rounding it to 0.72139754 or even truncating it to 0.72139753?
NOTE: I get the same result if I use the fraction as follows:
UPDATE NumericVal
SET ValExpected = CAST (3985 AS REAL) / CAST (5524 AS REAL)
WHERE NumericVal.ValItemCode = 2441 XAND ValTPCode = 4159|||SORRY:
The SQL Script above should read:
UPDATE NumericVal
SET ValExpected = CAST (3985 AS REAL) / CAST (5524 AS REAL)
WHERE NumericVal.ValItemCode = 2441 AND ValTPCode = 4159|||Adam,
A REAL just can't represent any value within 0.00000001 of
0.72139754.
declare @.r real
set @.r = 0.72139754
select @.r, cast(@.r as binary(4))
set @.r = 0.72139755
select @.r, cast(@.r as binary(4))
-- Results
0.72139752 0x3F38AD82
0.72139758 0x3F38AD83
The two binary values here are "adjacent" REAL values, and
the decimal output is rounded for display purposes to 8 places.
A REAL can't represent any value between these two.
Eight decimal places are shown because there are REAL values
that are different numbers but that have the same 7-place decimal
rounding. The tradeoff is then that there are 8-place decimal values
that are not the rounded version of any REAL. The decimal equivalent
of a REAL's precision is just over 7 digits.
SK
AdamHCC wrote:

>ValExpected is declared as a real variable.
>Why when storing the value would it store 0.72139752 rather than
>rounding it to 0.72139754 or even truncating it to 0.72139753?
>
>NOTE: I get the same result if I use the fraction as follows:
>UPDATE NumericVal
>SET ValExpected = CAST (3985 AS REAL) / CAST (5524 AS REAL)
>WHERE NumericVal.ValItemCode = 2441 XAND ValTPCode = 4159
>
>|||Thank you for all of your help. However I am still .
If REAL can only store that the number to seven places, why then does
it dump the following number into excel; 0.721397519111633 ?
This has far more digits that can be stored in REAL and is totally
incorrect after the first 7 decimal places. Why return another 8
decimal places that are incorrect? Surely common sense dictates that
this should not happen.|||Adam,
I can only guess, but I imagine that the connection between SQL Server
and Excel doesn't have the sophistication to distinguish between source
values that are 4-byte floating point and source values that are 8-byte
floating point, so Excel displays all "number" values to 15 decimal places
by default, since that is roughly the maximum that could be meaningful
without knowing more about the source type.
To be fair, the extra 8 decimal places are not "incorrect." Once the
value of a real number is stored in SQL Server, it is an exact value.
Nothing is stored along with the number to indicate whether precision
was lost when the number was stored.
SK
AdamHCC wrote:

>Thank you for all of your help. However I am still .
>If REAL can only store that the number to seven places, why then does
>it dump the following number into excel; 0.721397519111633 ?
>This has far more digits that can be stored in REAL and is totally
>incorrect after the first 7 decimal places. Why return another 8
>decimal places that are incorrect? Surely common sense dictates that
>this should not happen.
>
>

Rotate Text to flow vertically instead of horizontally

Is it possible in the SSRS Report Designer to rotate a textbox to run vertically, or simply to rotate the text in a textbox ? I have only seen this done within axes lables of charts, but not text boxes.

Thanks in advance,
Kenny
Hi Kenny -

Here's a link to another thread that should provide the answer you're looking for.

http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=491642&SiteID=1

HTH...

Joe