RowNumber reset at start of each grouping

I'm creating a report where I'd like to list out the lines of the report. I
deceided to use RowNumber function but it is keeping a running total when I
use it like this: RowNumber(Nothing)
I used the report wizard to create a report and used the page grouping to
seperate pages by "team". How do I find the scope to tell RowNumber to
startover for each team?
ColinYou can set the scope of RowNumber by replacing Nothing with the name of the
group where you want the reset to occur. If your group name is Team then you
would use RowNumber("Team").
"Colin" wrote:
> I'm creating a report where I'd like to list out the lines of the report. I
> deceided to use RowNumber function but it is keeping a running total when I
> use it like this: RowNumber(Nothing)
> I used the report wizard to create a report and used the page grouping to
> seperate pages by "team". How do I find the scope to tell RowNumber to
> startover for each team?
> Colin
>
>sql

RowNumber

I understand that if using this function with "nothing" between parentheses, then the running row total never resets.

However, I am hoping to have the row counter reset when a group value changes. I tried putting both the field and the defined group name in the parentheses both with and without quotes, but I get an error.

What is the correct syntax for accomplishing this?

This may help...

http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=903428&SiteID=1

cheers,

Andrew

row size

I have a vb app that I wrote that saves the info to my SQL database
(SBS2003)
For some reason (my app have been running fine for a couple of months) My
users are getting teh following error when trying to update certain records.
"Can not create a row size of 8436 which is greater than the allowable
maximum of 8060"
What's the deal? How can I fix this?
"johnfli" <john@.here.com> wrote in message
news:OwIiWMp7EHA.936@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I have a vb app that I wrote that saves the info to my SQL database
> (SBS2003)
> For some reason (my app have been running fine for a couple of months) My
> users are getting teh following error when trying to update certain
records.
> "Can not create a row size of 8436 which is greater than the allowable
> maximum of 8060"
> What's the deal? How can I fix this?
You can't. It's an inherent limit of SQL Server.
I'd look at what you're storing. Perhaps you can/need to split the table
into more than one table or move one or more fields to a text field.

>
|||You probably have one or more tables which have varchar columns. The total
lenght of all of the columns in a table can be greater than 8060 as long as
no one actually tries to insert a row which is larger...
For a while no one was adding large rows, now they are...
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"johnfli" <john@.here.com> wrote in message
news:OwIiWMp7EHA.936@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I have a vb app that I wrote that saves the info to my SQL database
> (SBS2003)
> For some reason (my app have been running fine for a couple of months) My
> users are getting teh following error when trying to update certain
records.
> "Can not create a row size of 8436 which is greater than the allowable
> maximum of 8060"
> What's the deal? How can I fix this?
>

row size

I have a vb app that I wrote that saves the info to my SQL database
(SBS2003)
For some reason (my app have been running fine for a couple of months) My
users are getting teh following error when trying to update certain records.
"Can not create a row size of 8436 which is greater than the allowable
maximum of 8060"
What's the deal? How can I fix this'"johnfli" <john@.here.com> wrote in message
news:OwIiWMp7EHA.936@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I have a vb app that I wrote that saves the info to my SQL database
> (SBS2003)
> For some reason (my app have been running fine for a couple of months) My
> users are getting teh following error when trying to update certain
records.
> "Can not create a row size of 8436 which is greater than the allowable
> maximum of 8060"
> What's the deal? How can I fix this'
You can't. It's an inherent limit of SQL Server.
I'd look at what you're storing. Perhaps you can/need to split the table
into more than one table or move one or more fields to a text field.

>|||You probably have one or more tables which have varchar columns. The total
lenght of all of the columns in a table can be greater than 8060 as long as
no one actually tries to insert a row which is larger...
For a while no one was adding large rows, now they are...
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"johnfli" <john@.here.com> wrote in message
news:OwIiWMp7EHA.936@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I have a vb app that I wrote that saves the info to my SQL database
> (SBS2003)
> For some reason (my app have been running fine for a couple of months) My
> users are getting teh following error when trying to update certain
records.
> "Can not create a row size of 8436 which is greater than the allowable
> maximum of 8060"
> What's the deal? How can I fix this'
>

row size

I have a vb app that I wrote that saves the info to my SQL database
(SBS2003)
For some reason (my app have been running fine for a couple of months) My
users are getting teh following error when trying to update certain records.
"Can not create a row size of 8436 which is greater than the allowable
maximum of 8060"
What's the deal? How can I fix this'"johnfli" <john@.here.com> wrote in message
news:OwIiWMp7EHA.936@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I have a vb app that I wrote that saves the info to my SQL database
> (SBS2003)
> For some reason (my app have been running fine for a couple of months) My
> users are getting teh following error when trying to update certain
records.
> "Can not create a row size of 8436 which is greater than the allowable
> maximum of 8060"
> What's the deal? How can I fix this'
You can't. It's an inherent limit of SQL Server.
I'd look at what you're storing. Perhaps you can/need to split the table
into more than one table or move one or more fields to a text field.
>|||You probably have one or more tables which have varchar columns. The total
lenght of all of the columns in a table can be greater than 8060 as long as
no one actually tries to insert a row which is larger...
For a while no one was adding large rows, now they are...
--
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"johnfli" <john@.here.com> wrote in message
news:OwIiWMp7EHA.936@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I have a vb app that I wrote that saves the info to my SQL database
> (SBS2003)
> For some reason (my app have been running fine for a couple of months) My
> users are getting teh following error when trying to update certain
records.
> "Can not create a row size of 8436 which is greater than the allowable
> maximum of 8060"
> What's the deal? How can I fix this'
>

Row operation cannot be reapplied

Hi,

I'm merge replicating between SQL Server 2005 and SQL Compact on mobile devices. This has been running reasonably well, after a lot of setup problems, but recently I've noticed an error when a new subscription synchronizes with the server (creating a new database on the device). After running for several minutes, the synchronization stops with the following error:

"The row operation cannot be reapplied due to an integrity violation. Check the publication filter. [Table = AppUser,Operation = Insert,RowGuid = ..."

There are no filters on the publication. The record causing the problem already exists on the server and is apparently being added to the new database on the subscriber, but it seems the merge agent is trying to add the record twice. I've tried doing a new snapshot and then immediately synchronizing, but still the same error. Has anyone come across this problem when synchronizing, especially with a new database/subscription?

Regards,

Greg

This error is created because of an integrity issue in you table schema. I had the same problem where I had created a foreign key relationship from one table to 2 fields in the joined table. For example:

My replication filtered on employee name (or HOST_NAME())

This employee table field existed in 2 fields of the joined table, ie: records could be sent to 2 subscriptions based on 2 fields in the record table which related to the employee table.

I had to delete the FK relationship in the database, and just kept the relationship in the filtered join in the replication. This solved the error.

|||

I encountered the problem too. Is the limitation of compact edition doesn't support FK relationship in the table?

Anyone had worked around the issue?

Jun

|||No, sql compact database supports fk relationships just fine. Replication, however, is very particular about the schema of the replicated tables. When setting up the replication be sure you know whether relationships are 1 to many, 1 to 1, or many to many. Any deviation from this will cause this or other errors. For example in my case I had 1 table FK relate to 2 fields in another table, although this schema can be fine in a normal production database, when replicated, it makes it hard for the replication to keep track of GUIDs and other replication objects. So I just deleted one of the relationships and kept the other.|||

I am having a very similar issue - how did you get the error message to include the actual table, guid, etc. My error message is as follows:

The row operation cannot be reapplied due to an integrity violation. Check the Publication filter. [,,,Table,Operation,RowGuid] (Source: MSSQLServer, Error number: 28549)

I have a filter using HOST_NAME() as well with your typical FK's 1 field in one table to 1 field in another.

I am under the gun to get this app out and I just can not get enough details on this error to resolve, any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Daniel

|||Since your error is not specifying a certain table, you'll have to test it 1 relationship at a time starting with the main filter relationship. Drop the relationship in the production database, re-create snapshot and reinitialize subscriptions until you've removed the errored relationship. Then re-examine your schema to determine why the error happened and see if you can re-design the relationship. Good luck.|||

Wow, there is no way to turn on additional logging that would produce a more detailed error message?

Row operation cannot be reapplied

Hi,

I'm merge replicating between SQL Server 2005 and SQL Compact on mobile devices. This has been running reasonably well, after a lot of setup problems, but recently I've noticed an error when a new subscription synchronizes with the server (creating a new database on the device). After running for several minutes, the synchronization stops with the following error:

"The row operation cannot be reapplied due to an integrity violation. Check the publication filter. [Table = AppUser,Operation = Insert,RowGuid = ..."

There are no filters on the publication. The record causing the problem already exists on the server and is apparently being added to the new database on the subscriber, but it seems the merge agent is trying to add the record twice. I've tried doing a new snapshot and then immediately synchronizing, but still the same error. Has anyone come across this problem when synchronizing, especially with a new database/subscription?

Regards,

Greg

This error is created because of an integrity issue in you table schema. I had the same problem where I had created a foreign key relationship from one table to 2 fields in the joined table. For example:

My replication filtered on employee name (or HOST_NAME())

This employee table field existed in 2 fields of the joined table, ie: records could be sent to 2 subscriptions based on 2 fields in the record table which related to the employee table.

I had to delete the FK relationship in the database, and just kept the relationship in the filtered join in the replication. This solved the error.

|||

I encountered the problem too. Is the limitation of compact edition doesn't support FK relationship in the table?

Anyone had worked around the issue?

Jun

|||No, sql compact database supports fk relationships just fine. Replication, however, is very particular about the schema of the replicated tables. When setting up the replication be sure you know whether relationships are 1 to many, 1 to 1, or many to many. Any deviation from this will cause this or other errors. For example in my case I had 1 table FK relate to 2 fields in another table, although this schema can be fine in a normal production database, when replicated, it makes it hard for the replication to keep track of GUIDs and other replication objects. So I just deleted one of the relationships and kept the other.|||

I am having a very similar issue - how did you get the error message to include the actual table, guid, etc. My error message is as follows:

The row operation cannot be reapplied due to an integrity violation. Check the Publication filter. [,,,Table,Operation,RowGuid] (Source: MSSQLServer, Error number: 28549)

I have a filter using HOST_NAME() as well with your typical FK's 1 field in one table to 1 field in another.

I am under the gun to get this app out and I just can not get enough details on this error to resolve, any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Daniel

|||Since your error is not specifying a certain table, you'll have to test it 1 relationship at a time starting with the main filter relationship. Drop the relationship in the production database, re-create snapshot and reinitialize subscriptions until you've removed the errored relationship. Then re-examine your schema to determine why the error happened and see if you can re-design the relationship. Good luck.|||

Wow, there is no way to turn on additional logging that would produce a more detailed error message?

row count

I want to get a row count at the end of a report that I am running. Is there
a way to do this, or do I have to write the code? If I have to write it, can
anyone give me a how to guide on writing .net components for reporting
services?
--
www.duanelawrence.comCheck the CountRows() function:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/rscreate/htm/rcr_creating_expressions_v1_0k6r.asp
E.g.
=CountRows("DataSetName")
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"duanelawrence.com" <duanelawrencecom@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:A7A14867-F57E-4C54-B1DF-A3A70FE186FE@.microsoft.com...
> I want to get a row count at the end of a report that I am running. Is
there
> a way to do this, or do I have to write the code? If I have to write it,
can
> anyone give me a how to guide on writing .net components for reporting
> services?
> --
>
> www.duanelawrence.com
>

Routine crashing of Visual Studio 2005 when running or editing SSIS

We have found that it is common for Visual Studio 2005 to crash when editing or running SSIS packages -- from CTP versions through beta versions and including the release version.

Of course we kept hoping that newer releases would become more stable, or at least more robust -- and now I'm hoping there will be a service pack, which might make it more robust?Can you repro the crashes, have you submitted the bug report?|||Please consider this the bug report then -- this is all I know -- it very often crashes.

We have never observed any correlation to any action in particular, or even to any particular development machine or package.

So there isn't anything obvious for me to even try to reproduce them at a desired time. So I cannot really make any useful bug report -- at least, as a programmer, I think a bug report isn't too useful until it either is reproducible or at the very least is correlated to something.

It just tends to to crash -- well, ok, a common point (but not too helpful I guess) is that all the machines involved use Windows Server 2003, and some version of SQL Server 2005 -- now they all use SQL Server 2005 release or SQL Server 2005 SP1, as all have either been upgraded to release or reinstalled with release -- we no longer use any CTP or beta versions.

Another common point is they mostly use the same set of databases.

Oh, and most are x32 versions, except one is an x64 version of Windows Server 2003 SP1.

On some forum somewhere, someone pointed me to some beta newsgroups and asked me to submit some of my many SSIS bug reports to it, but I spent some time trying to access it, and went through the usual connectivity problems involved with hotmail or passport, and never could get access. I posted my bugs, and my descriptions of how I could not access the site to file them then, and didn't get any followups, so I didn't see anything else to do with them.

I never found any simple working system to submit bugs, except to post them to SSIS forums I could find, so I just did that, in hopes they'd help someone at Microsoft who saw them. But, those bug reports at least had descriptive & often proscriptive info -- here, I don't even have that.

I was kind of hoping that an upgrade to SSIS would come along that would fix a lot of the crashes, and hopefully also fix the parameter parsing problems in SSIS -- apparently the msdn help is still not updated to reflect how OLEDB parameter parsing in the ExecuteSQL control flow task really works?|||bug reports may be submitted at the sql server feedback page: http://connect.microsoft.com/feedback/default.aspx?SiteID=68

Rounding problems

I have rounding problems when editing or inserting a new record in float type fields.
e.g. I have a cursor running an agrregate SQL statement. I have a calculated field Sum(DFactor*Cost). DFactor gets values -1,1 and values of Cost in the table have 2 digits. I get these values in a variable e.g. @.FCost. Then I round @.FCost=Round(@.FCost,2).
When I try to inert this value to a new record again I'using Round(@.FCost,2).
However in a lot of records a lot of digits are stored.
I have the same probelm when trying to insert values from MSAccess by ODBC. Although I'm using CLng(@.FCost*100)/100 in order to have 2 digits, a lot of demical values are created.
What is the best practise in order to solve this problem?
Regards,
ManolisIf you are using a FLOAT column to store data of type MONEY, that's a problem. If you are using a FLOAT column to store data of type DECIMAL (x, 2), that's also a problem. Is your underlying problem one of datatype, not actually rounding?

-PatP|||Although I'm using CLng(@.FCost*100)/100 in order to have 2 digits, a lot of demical values are created.The result will have decimals. You need this: CLng(@.FCost*100/100)

Rough estimate of Database Size

We are running a Finance System using SQL Server 2000. The production
database is around 20GB in size.
Since the system supports SQL Server 2005 and we are going to replace the
existing server, we would like to use SQL Server 2005 as backend database.
As we are in the sizing stage, we would like to get an estimate of the
database with SQL Server 2005.
We would like to know is there any way to find out the size of the
corresponding SQL server 2005 database. We would also like to know what
factors affect the size of database ? Is there any special feature in SQL
Server 2005 takes up more space ?
ThanksPeter
Don't you perfrom some monitoring such as how often your DB was growing?
What does the appliaction do more INSERTS/UPDATE/DELETE or SELECTs?
Well I know it is hard to get on right target , so create the database with
max estimated size and don't use Automatically autogrow file feature. It is
very important especially for LOG file as it grows much more often than
DATA file. Use filegrowth in megabytes feature ,something like 500 MB or 1GB
For SQL Server 2005 there is 'instant file initialization' feature( for
data files only) . Make sure that SQL Server account is added to Perform
volume Maintenance Task
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/931843
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/tsprfprb.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/workingwithtempdb.mspx
"Peter" <Peter@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:eVypU0V6HHA.5212@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> We are running a Finance System using SQL Server 2000. The production
> database is around 20GB in size.
> Since the system supports SQL Server 2005 and we are going to replace the
> existing server, we would like to use SQL Server 2005 as backend database.
> As we are in the sizing stage, we would like to get an estimate of the
> database with SQL Server 2005.
> We would like to know is there any way to find out the size of the
> corresponding SQL server 2005 database. We would also like to know what
> factors affect the size of database ? Is there any special feature in SQL
> Server 2005 takes up more space ?
> Thanks
>|||Dear Uri,
The database has around 100 insert / update transactions a day. The others
just perform read only.
Does index structure in SQL Server 2000 is different from that from SQL
Server 2005 ?
Thanks
Peter
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:eLtsDDW6HHA.5316@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Peter
> Don't you perfrom some monitoring such as how often your DB was growing?
> What does the appliaction do more INSERTS/UPDATE/DELETE or SELECTs?
> Well I know it is hard to get on right target , so create the database
> with max estimated size and don't use Automatically autogrow file
> feature. It is very important especially for LOG file as it grows much
> more often than DATA file. Use filegrowth in megabytes feature ,something
> like 500 MB or 1GB
> For SQL Server 2005 there is 'instant file initialization' feature( for
> data files only) . Make sure that SQL Server account is added to Perform
> volume Maintenance Task
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/931843
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/tsprfprb.mspx
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/workingwithtempdb.mspx
> "Peter" <Peter@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:eVypU0V6HHA.5212@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> We are running a Finance System using SQL Server 2000. The production
>> database is around 20GB in size.
>> Since the system supports SQL Server 2005 and we are going to replace the
>> existing server, we would like to use SQL Server 2005 as backend
>> database.
>> As we are in the sizing stage, we would like to get an estimate of the
>> database with SQL Server 2005.
>> We would like to know is there any way to find out the size of the
>> corresponding SQL server 2005 database. We would also like to know what
>> factors affect the size of database ? Is there any special feature in
>> SQL Server 2005 takes up more space ?
>> Thanks
>|||Peter
> Does index structure in SQL Server 2000 is different from that from SQL
> Server 2005 ?
No
"Peter" <Peter@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23xO2eNW6HHA.3940@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Dear Uri,
> The database has around 100 insert / update transactions a day. The
> others just perform read only.
> Does index structure in SQL Server 2000 is different from that from SQL
> Server 2005 ?
> Thanks
> Peter
> "Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
> news:eLtsDDW6HHA.5316@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Peter
>> Don't you perfrom some monitoring such as how often your DB was growing?
>> What does the appliaction do more INSERTS/UPDATE/DELETE or SELECTs?
>> Well I know it is hard to get on right target , so create the database
>> with max estimated size and don't use Automatically autogrow file
>> feature. It is very important especially for LOG file as it grows much
>> more often than DATA file. Use filegrowth in megabytes feature ,something
>> like 500 MB or 1GB
>> For SQL Server 2005 there is 'instant file initialization' feature( for
>> data files only) . Make sure that SQL Server account is added to Perform
>> volume Maintenance Task
>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/931843
>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/tsprfprb.mspx
>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/workingwithtempdb.mspx
>> "Peter" <Peter@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:eVypU0V6HHA.5212@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> We are running a Finance System using SQL Server 2000. The production
>> database is around 20GB in size.
>> Since the system supports SQL Server 2005 and we are going to replace
>> the existing server, we would like to use SQL Server 2005 as backend
>> database.
>> As we are in the sizing stage, we would like to get an estimate of the
>> database with SQL Server 2005.
>> We would like to know is there any way to find out the size of the
>> corresponding SQL server 2005 database. We would also like to know what
>> factors affect the size of database ? Is there any special feature in
>> SQL Server 2005 takes up more space ?
>> Thanks
>>
>|||You can use your existing SQL Server 2000 database as a good estimate of
2005 space requirements. The new features that come to mind that will
affect space are vardecimal and included index columns. Tempdb space may
need to be significantly larger, depending on the features you use. See
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/workingwithtempdb.mspx.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Peter" <Peter@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:eVypU0V6HHA.5212@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> We are running a Finance System using SQL Server 2000. The production
> database is around 20GB in size.
> Since the system supports SQL Server 2005 and we are going to replace the
> existing server, we would like to use SQL Server 2005 as backend database.
> As we are in the sizing stage, we would like to get an estimate of the
> database with SQL Server 2005.
> We would like to know is there any way to find out the size of the
> corresponding SQL server 2005 database. We would also like to know what
> factors affect the size of database ? Is there any special feature in SQL
> Server 2005 takes up more space ?
> Thanks
>|||Isn't instant file initialization an Enterprise Edition only feature?
TheSQLGuru
President
Indicium Resources, Inc.
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:eLtsDDW6HHA.5316@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Peter
> Don't you perfrom some monitoring such as how often your DB was growing?
> What does the appliaction do more INSERTS/UPDATE/DELETE or SELECTs?
> Well I know it is hard to get on right target , so create the database
> with max estimated size and don't use Automatically autogrow file
> feature. It is very important especially for LOG file as it grows much
> more often than DATA file. Use filegrowth in megabytes feature ,something
> like 500 MB or 1GB
> For SQL Server 2005 there is 'instant file initialization' feature( for
> data files only) . Make sure that SQL Server account is added to Perform
> volume Maintenance Task
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/931843
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/tsprfprb.mspx
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/workingwithtempdb.mspx
> "Peter" <Peter@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:eVypU0V6HHA.5212@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> We are running a Finance System using SQL Server 2000. The production
>> database is around 20GB in size.
>> Since the system supports SQL Server 2005 and we are going to replace the
>> existing server, we would like to use SQL Server 2005 as backend
>> database.
>> As we are in the sizing stage, we would like to get an estimate of the
>> database with SQL Server 2005.
>> We would like to know is there any way to find out the size of the
>> corresponding SQL server 2005 database. We would also like to know what
>> factors affect the size of database ? Is there any special feature in
>> SQL Server 2005 takes up more space ?
>> Thanks
>|||On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:20:06 +0300, "Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il>
wrote:
>Peter
>> Does index structure in SQL Server 2000 is different from that from SQL
>> Server 2005 ?
>No
Isn't there something about the uniquifiers for clustered indexes ...
But even if IIRC, that's not going to cost more than a percent or so
on a typical database. Is it?
J.|||JXStern
> Isn't there something about the uniquifiers for clustered indexes ...
No it is the same, i.e if you create CI but not UNIQUE , sql server adds
uniquifiers to the index
> But even if IIRC, that's not going to cost more than a percent or so
> on a typical database. Is it?
Sorry , what is IIRC?
"JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@.gte.net> wrote in message
news:vue8d351pro4etm0hr1bi04pp8802in7hj@.4ax.com...
> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:20:06 +0300, "Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il>
> wrote:
>>Peter
>> Does index structure in SQL Server 2000 is different from that from SQL
>> Server 2005 ?
>>No
> Isn't there something about the uniquifiers for clustered indexes ...
> But even if IIRC, that's not going to cost more than a percent or so
> on a typical database. Is it?
> J.
>|||On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 10:50:49 +0300, "Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il>
wrote:
>JXStern
>> Isn't there something about the uniquifiers for clustered indexes ...
>No it is the same, i.e if you create CI but not UNIQUE , sql server adds
>uniquifiers to the index
>> But even if IIRC, that's not going to cost more than a percent or so
>> on a typical database. Is it?
>Sorry , what is IIRC?
If I Recall Correctly ... but it looks like I didn't.
J.
>"JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R@.gte.net> wrote in message
>news:vue8d351pro4etm0hr1bi04pp8802in7hj@.4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:20:06 +0300, "Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il>
>> wrote:
>>Peter
>> Does index structure in SQL Server 2000 is different from that from SQL
>> Server 2005 ?
>>No
>> Isn't there something about the uniquifiers for clustered indexes ...
>> But even if IIRC, that's not going to cost more than a percent or so
>> on a typical database. Is it?
>> J.
>