I think the only way you could do this is to capture the Trace events
This thread has some samples showing you how to create and use Trace events from code.
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=482459&SiteID=1
2012年3月20日星期二
Any way to get processing status when executing a large batch process job via AMO?
When making an ExecuteCaptureLog() AMO call, is there any way the client can poll for processing status from the SSAS insance?
2012年3月19日星期一
any way to attach a printscreen
Hi ,
Am i able to attach print screens as the error message given by SQL is quite
long
tks & rdgs
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200603/1
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:04:29 GMT, maxzsim via droptable.com wrote:
>Hi ,
> Am i able to attach print screens as the error message given by SQL is quite
>long
Hi maxzsim,
Depends on the front-end you are using toa ccess the groups. I see in
the headers and in the added ad that you use SQLMonster. This is nothing
but a portal to the groups - they are not hosted by SQLMonster, but they
are Usenet groups. There are more portals to these groups, similar to
SQLMonster, that are used by other users. And many users use a
newsreader and a subscription to a usenet provider to access the groups
directly.
Though some of the portals would allow you to attach a screenprint, you
really shouldn't. In usenet, all binary content should be in one of the
many "binaries" groups. This group is "text only". Not all usenet
providers respect that unwritten law of usenet - but many do, and they
would either strip the attachment off of your message before propagating
it, or block the message completely.
The best way to get a long error message here is to run the offending
query in Query Analyzer, then use copy and paste to get the error
message from the QA output screen to the message.
And if you ever do need to post a screenshot, post it somewhere on a web
site where you have access, and post a link (plus a description of what
you link to) in the message.
Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server MVP
|||Hi Hugo ,
tk you very much for ur explanation and advice
rdgs
Hugo Kornelis wrote:
>Hi maxzsim,
>Depends on the front-end you are using toa ccess the groups. I see in
>the headers and in the added ad that you use SQLMonster. This is nothing
>but a portal to the groups - they are not hosted by SQLMonster, but they
>are Usenet groups. There are more portals to these groups, similar to
>SQLMonster, that are used by other users. And many users use a
>newsreader and a subscription to a usenet provider to access the groups
>directly.
>Though some of the portals would allow you to attach a screenprint, you
>really shouldn't. In usenet, all binary content should be in one of the
>many "binaries" groups. This group is "text only". Not all usenet
>providers respect that unwritten law of usenet - but many do, and they
>would either strip the attachment off of your message before propagating
>it, or block the message completely.
>The best way to get a long error message here is to run the offending
>query in Query Analyzer, then use copy and paste to get the error
>message from the QA output screen to the message.
>And if you ever do need to post a screenshot, post it somewhere on a web
>site where you have access, and post a link (plus a description of what
>you link to) in the message.
>
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200603/1
Am i able to attach print screens as the error message given by SQL is quite
long
tks & rdgs
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200603/1
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:04:29 GMT, maxzsim via droptable.com wrote:
>Hi ,
> Am i able to attach print screens as the error message given by SQL is quite
>long
Hi maxzsim,
Depends on the front-end you are using toa ccess the groups. I see in
the headers and in the added ad that you use SQLMonster. This is nothing
but a portal to the groups - they are not hosted by SQLMonster, but they
are Usenet groups. There are more portals to these groups, similar to
SQLMonster, that are used by other users. And many users use a
newsreader and a subscription to a usenet provider to access the groups
directly.
Though some of the portals would allow you to attach a screenprint, you
really shouldn't. In usenet, all binary content should be in one of the
many "binaries" groups. This group is "text only". Not all usenet
providers respect that unwritten law of usenet - but many do, and they
would either strip the attachment off of your message before propagating
it, or block the message completely.
The best way to get a long error message here is to run the offending
query in Query Analyzer, then use copy and paste to get the error
message from the QA output screen to the message.
And if you ever do need to post a screenshot, post it somewhere on a web
site where you have access, and post a link (plus a description of what
you link to) in the message.
Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server MVP
|||Hi Hugo ,
tk you very much for ur explanation and advice
rdgs
Hugo Kornelis wrote:
>Hi maxzsim,
>Depends on the front-end you are using toa ccess the groups. I see in
>the headers and in the added ad that you use SQLMonster. This is nothing
>but a portal to the groups - they are not hosted by SQLMonster, but they
>are Usenet groups. There are more portals to these groups, similar to
>SQLMonster, that are used by other users. And many users use a
>newsreader and a subscription to a usenet provider to access the groups
>directly.
>Though some of the portals would allow you to attach a screenprint, you
>really shouldn't. In usenet, all binary content should be in one of the
>many "binaries" groups. This group is "text only". Not all usenet
>providers respect that unwritten law of usenet - but many do, and they
>would either strip the attachment off of your message before propagating
>it, or block the message completely.
>The best way to get a long error message here is to run the offending
>query in Query Analyzer, then use copy and paste to get the error
>message from the QA output screen to the message.
>And if you ever do need to post a screenshot, post it somewhere on a web
>site where you have access, and post a link (plus a description of what
>you link to) in the message.
>
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200603/1
any way to attach a printscreen
Hi ,
Am i able to attach print screens as the error message given by SQL is quite
long
tks & rdgs
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200603/1On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:04:29 GMT, maxzsim via droptable.com wrote:
>Hi ,
> Am i able to attach print screens as the error message given by SQL is qui
te
>long
Hi maxzsim,
Depends on the front-end you are using toa ccess the groups. I see in
the headers and in the added ad that you use SQLMonster. This is nothing
but a portal to the groups - they are not hosted by SQLMonster, but they
are Usenet groups. There are more portals to these groups, similar to
SQLMonster, that are used by other users. And many users use a
newsreader and a subscription to a usenet provider to access the groups
directly.
Though some of the portals would allow you to attach a screenprint, you
really shouldn't. In usenet, all binary content should be in one of the
many "binaries" groups. This group is "text only". Not all usenet
providers respect that unwritten law of usenet - but many do, and they
would either strip the attachment off of your message before propagating
it, or block the message completely.
The best way to get a long error message here is to run the offending
query in Query Analyzer, then use copy and paste to get the error
message from the QA output screen to the message.
And if you ever do need to post a screenshot, post it somewhere on a web
site where you have access, and post a link (plus a description of what
you link to) in the message.
Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server MVP|||Hi Hugo ,
tk you very much for ur explanation and advice
rdgs
Hugo Kornelis wrote:
>Hi maxzsim,
>Depends on the front-end you are using toa ccess the groups. I see in
>the headers and in the added ad that you use SQLMonster. This is nothing
>but a portal to the groups - they are not hosted by SQLMonster, but they
>are Usenet groups. There are more portals to these groups, similar to
>SQLMonster, that are used by other users. And many users use a
>newsreader and a subscription to a usenet provider to access the groups
>directly.
>Though some of the portals would allow you to attach a screenprint, you
>really shouldn't. In usenet, all binary content should be in one of the
>many "binaries" groups. This group is "text only". Not all usenet
>providers respect that unwritten law of usenet - but many do, and they
>would either strip the attachment off of your message before propagating
>it, or block the message completely.
>The best way to get a long error message here is to run the offending
>query in Query Analyzer, then use copy and paste to get the error
>message from the QA output screen to the message.
>And if you ever do need to post a screenshot, post it somewhere on a web
>site where you have access, and post a link (plus a description of what
>you link to) in the message.
>
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200603/1
Am i able to attach print screens as the error message given by SQL is quite
long
tks & rdgs
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200603/1On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:04:29 GMT, maxzsim via droptable.com wrote:
>Hi ,
> Am i able to attach print screens as the error message given by SQL is qui
te
>long
Hi maxzsim,
Depends on the front-end you are using toa ccess the groups. I see in
the headers and in the added ad that you use SQLMonster. This is nothing
but a portal to the groups - they are not hosted by SQLMonster, but they
are Usenet groups. There are more portals to these groups, similar to
SQLMonster, that are used by other users. And many users use a
newsreader and a subscription to a usenet provider to access the groups
directly.
Though some of the portals would allow you to attach a screenprint, you
really shouldn't. In usenet, all binary content should be in one of the
many "binaries" groups. This group is "text only". Not all usenet
providers respect that unwritten law of usenet - but many do, and they
would either strip the attachment off of your message before propagating
it, or block the message completely.
The best way to get a long error message here is to run the offending
query in Query Analyzer, then use copy and paste to get the error
message from the QA output screen to the message.
And if you ever do need to post a screenshot, post it somewhere on a web
site where you have access, and post a link (plus a description of what
you link to) in the message.
Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server MVP|||Hi Hugo ,
tk you very much for ur explanation and advice
rdgs
Hugo Kornelis wrote:
>Hi maxzsim,
>Depends on the front-end you are using toa ccess the groups. I see in
>the headers and in the added ad that you use SQLMonster. This is nothing
>but a portal to the groups - they are not hosted by SQLMonster, but they
>are Usenet groups. There are more portals to these groups, similar to
>SQLMonster, that are used by other users. And many users use a
>newsreader and a subscription to a usenet provider to access the groups
>directly.
>Though some of the portals would allow you to attach a screenprint, you
>really shouldn't. In usenet, all binary content should be in one of the
>many "binaries" groups. This group is "text only". Not all usenet
>providers respect that unwritten law of usenet - but many do, and they
>would either strip the attachment off of your message before propagating
>it, or block the message completely.
>The best way to get a long error message here is to run the offending
>query in Query Analyzer, then use copy and paste to get the error
>message from the QA output screen to the message.
>And if you ever do need to post a screenshot, post it somewhere on a web
>site where you have access, and post a link (plus a description of what
>you link to) in the message.
>
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200603/1
any way to attach a printscreen
Hi ,
Am i able to attach print screens as the error message given by SQL is quite
long
tks & rdgs
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200603/1On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:04:29 GMT, maxzsim via SQLMonster.com wrote:
>Hi ,
> Am i able to attach print screens as the error message given by SQL is quite
>long
Hi maxzsim,
Depends on the front-end you are using toa ccess the groups. I see in
the headers and in the added ad that you use SQLMonster. This is nothing
but a portal to the groups - they are not hosted by SQLMonster, but they
are Usenet groups. There are more portals to these groups, similar to
SQLMonster, that are used by other users. And many users use a
newsreader and a subscription to a usenet provider to access the groups
directly.
Though some of the portals would allow you to attach a screenprint, you
really shouldn't. In usenet, all binary content should be in one of the
many "binaries" groups. This group is "text only". Not all usenet
providers respect that unwritten law of usenet - but many do, and they
would either strip the attachment off of your message before propagating
it, or block the message completely.
The best way to get a long error message here is to run the offending
query in Query Analyzer, then use copy and paste to get the error
message from the QA output screen to the message.
And if you ever do need to post a screenshot, post it somewhere on a web
site where you have access, and post a link (plus a description of what
you link to) in the message.
--
Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server MVP|||Hi Hugo ,
tk you very much for ur explanation and advice
rdgs
Hugo Kornelis wrote:
>>Hi ,
>> Am i able to attach print screens as the error message given by SQL is quite
>>long
>Hi maxzsim,
>Depends on the front-end you are using toa ccess the groups. I see in
>the headers and in the added ad that you use SQLMonster. This is nothing
>but a portal to the groups - they are not hosted by SQLMonster, but they
>are Usenet groups. There are more portals to these groups, similar to
>SQLMonster, that are used by other users. And many users use a
>newsreader and a subscription to a usenet provider to access the groups
>directly.
>Though some of the portals would allow you to attach a screenprint, you
>really shouldn't. In usenet, all binary content should be in one of the
>many "binaries" groups. This group is "text only". Not all usenet
>providers respect that unwritten law of usenet - but many do, and they
>would either strip the attachment off of your message before propagating
>it, or block the message completely.
>The best way to get a long error message here is to run the offending
>query in Query Analyzer, then use copy and paste to get the error
>message from the QA output screen to the message.
>And if you ever do need to post a screenshot, post it somewhere on a web
>site where you have access, and post a link (plus a description of what
>you link to) in the message.
>
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200603/1
Am i able to attach print screens as the error message given by SQL is quite
long
tks & rdgs
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200603/1On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:04:29 GMT, maxzsim via SQLMonster.com wrote:
>Hi ,
> Am i able to attach print screens as the error message given by SQL is quite
>long
Hi maxzsim,
Depends on the front-end you are using toa ccess the groups. I see in
the headers and in the added ad that you use SQLMonster. This is nothing
but a portal to the groups - they are not hosted by SQLMonster, but they
are Usenet groups. There are more portals to these groups, similar to
SQLMonster, that are used by other users. And many users use a
newsreader and a subscription to a usenet provider to access the groups
directly.
Though some of the portals would allow you to attach a screenprint, you
really shouldn't. In usenet, all binary content should be in one of the
many "binaries" groups. This group is "text only". Not all usenet
providers respect that unwritten law of usenet - but many do, and they
would either strip the attachment off of your message before propagating
it, or block the message completely.
The best way to get a long error message here is to run the offending
query in Query Analyzer, then use copy and paste to get the error
message from the QA output screen to the message.
And if you ever do need to post a screenshot, post it somewhere on a web
site where you have access, and post a link (plus a description of what
you link to) in the message.
--
Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server MVP|||Hi Hugo ,
tk you very much for ur explanation and advice
rdgs
Hugo Kornelis wrote:
>>Hi ,
>> Am i able to attach print screens as the error message given by SQL is quite
>>long
>Hi maxzsim,
>Depends on the front-end you are using toa ccess the groups. I see in
>the headers and in the added ad that you use SQLMonster. This is nothing
>but a portal to the groups - they are not hosted by SQLMonster, but they
>are Usenet groups. There are more portals to these groups, similar to
>SQLMonster, that are used by other users. And many users use a
>newsreader and a subscription to a usenet provider to access the groups
>directly.
>Though some of the portals would allow you to attach a screenprint, you
>really shouldn't. In usenet, all binary content should be in one of the
>many "binaries" groups. This group is "text only". Not all usenet
>providers respect that unwritten law of usenet - but many do, and they
>would either strip the attachment off of your message before propagating
>it, or block the message completely.
>The best way to get a long error message here is to run the offending
>query in Query Analyzer, then use copy and paste to get the error
>message from the QA output screen to the message.
>And if you ever do need to post a screenshot, post it somewhere on a web
>site where you have access, and post a link (plus a description of what
>you link to) in the message.
>
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200603/1
2012年2月18日星期六
Any harm in changing nullability while a default exists for a colu
Hi,
In Microsoft SQL Server 2000 SP3 are there any potential drawbacks of
changing the table column nullability via the ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN while
a default is also defined for that column? If yes, what are they?
--
Many thanks,
OskarYou'll need to drop the default constraint before ALTER TABLE...ALTER COLUMN
and re-add the constraint afterwards.
Column nullability doesn't affect the behavior of the default constraint so
I'm not aware of any drawbacks. The default value is used only when the
column is not included in the column list of an INSERT statement. Of
course, an explicit NULL value will be permitted only when the column allows
nulls.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Oskar" <Oskar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D50EF76B-BF46-4B49-9AD9-07364BF75E8A@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> In Microsoft SQL Server 2000 SP3 are there any potential drawbacks of
> changing the table column nullability via the ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN
> while
> a default is also defined for that column? If yes, what are they?
> --
> Many thanks,
> Oskar
>|||Yes, but when I needed to change a column from NULL to NOT NULL in one of the
tables and a default was defined on that column, the SQL Server parser didn't
complain about that. It allowed me to change the definition without any
warnings. Does this mean that I've done it in the wrong way? If yes, why?
--
Many thanks,
Oskar
"Dan Guzman" wrote:
> You'll need to drop the default constraint before ALTER TABLE...ALTER COLUMN
> and re-add the constraint afterwards.
> Column nullability doesn't affect the behavior of the default constraint so
> I'm not aware of any drawbacks. The default value is used only when the
> column is not included in the column list of an INSERT statement. Of
> course, an explicit NULL value will be permitted only when the column allows
> nulls.
>
> --
> Hope this helps.
> Dan Guzman
> SQL Server MVP
> "Oskar" <Oskar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:D50EF76B-BF46-4B49-9AD9-07364BF75E8A@.microsoft.com...
> > Hi,
> > In Microsoft SQL Server 2000 SP3 are there any potential drawbacks of
> > changing the table column nullability via the ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN
> > while
> > a default is also defined for that column? If yes, what are they?
> >
> > --
> > Many thanks,
> > Oskar
> >
> >
>
>|||No, Oskar, you didn't do anything wrong. My comment about dropping and
re-adding the constraint applies when changing the column data type but not
when changing only column nullability. Sorry for the confusion.
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Oskar" <Oskar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3049DDD6-BA64-4A17-BEB6-7B34B9C68D80@.microsoft.com...
> Yes, but when I needed to change a column from NULL to NOT NULL in one of
> the
> tables and a default was defined on that column, the SQL Server parser
> didn't
> complain about that. It allowed me to change the definition without any
> warnings. Does this mean that I've done it in the wrong way? If yes, why?
> --
> Many thanks,
> Oskar
> "Dan Guzman" wrote:
>> You'll need to drop the default constraint before ALTER TABLE...ALTER
>> COLUMN
>> and re-add the constraint afterwards.
>> Column nullability doesn't affect the behavior of the default constraint
>> so
>> I'm not aware of any drawbacks. The default value is used only when the
>> column is not included in the column list of an INSERT statement. Of
>> course, an explicit NULL value will be permitted only when the column
>> allows
>> nulls.
>>
>> --
>> Hope this helps.
>> Dan Guzman
>> SQL Server MVP
>> "Oskar" <Oskar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:D50EF76B-BF46-4B49-9AD9-07364BF75E8A@.microsoft.com...
>> > Hi,
>> > In Microsoft SQL Server 2000 SP3 are there any potential drawbacks of
>> > changing the table column nullability via the ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN
>> > while
>> > a default is also defined for that column? If yes, what are they?
>> >
>> > --
>> > Many thanks,
>> > Oskar
>> >
>> >
>>
In Microsoft SQL Server 2000 SP3 are there any potential drawbacks of
changing the table column nullability via the ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN while
a default is also defined for that column? If yes, what are they?
--
Many thanks,
OskarYou'll need to drop the default constraint before ALTER TABLE...ALTER COLUMN
and re-add the constraint afterwards.
Column nullability doesn't affect the behavior of the default constraint so
I'm not aware of any drawbacks. The default value is used only when the
column is not included in the column list of an INSERT statement. Of
course, an explicit NULL value will be permitted only when the column allows
nulls.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Oskar" <Oskar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D50EF76B-BF46-4B49-9AD9-07364BF75E8A@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> In Microsoft SQL Server 2000 SP3 are there any potential drawbacks of
> changing the table column nullability via the ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN
> while
> a default is also defined for that column? If yes, what are they?
> --
> Many thanks,
> Oskar
>|||Yes, but when I needed to change a column from NULL to NOT NULL in one of the
tables and a default was defined on that column, the SQL Server parser didn't
complain about that. It allowed me to change the definition without any
warnings. Does this mean that I've done it in the wrong way? If yes, why?
--
Many thanks,
Oskar
"Dan Guzman" wrote:
> You'll need to drop the default constraint before ALTER TABLE...ALTER COLUMN
> and re-add the constraint afterwards.
> Column nullability doesn't affect the behavior of the default constraint so
> I'm not aware of any drawbacks. The default value is used only when the
> column is not included in the column list of an INSERT statement. Of
> course, an explicit NULL value will be permitted only when the column allows
> nulls.
>
> --
> Hope this helps.
> Dan Guzman
> SQL Server MVP
> "Oskar" <Oskar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:D50EF76B-BF46-4B49-9AD9-07364BF75E8A@.microsoft.com...
> > Hi,
> > In Microsoft SQL Server 2000 SP3 are there any potential drawbacks of
> > changing the table column nullability via the ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN
> > while
> > a default is also defined for that column? If yes, what are they?
> >
> > --
> > Many thanks,
> > Oskar
> >
> >
>
>|||No, Oskar, you didn't do anything wrong. My comment about dropping and
re-adding the constraint applies when changing the column data type but not
when changing only column nullability. Sorry for the confusion.
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Oskar" <Oskar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3049DDD6-BA64-4A17-BEB6-7B34B9C68D80@.microsoft.com...
> Yes, but when I needed to change a column from NULL to NOT NULL in one of
> the
> tables and a default was defined on that column, the SQL Server parser
> didn't
> complain about that. It allowed me to change the definition without any
> warnings. Does this mean that I've done it in the wrong way? If yes, why?
> --
> Many thanks,
> Oskar
> "Dan Guzman" wrote:
>> You'll need to drop the default constraint before ALTER TABLE...ALTER
>> COLUMN
>> and re-add the constraint afterwards.
>> Column nullability doesn't affect the behavior of the default constraint
>> so
>> I'm not aware of any drawbacks. The default value is used only when the
>> column is not included in the column list of an INSERT statement. Of
>> course, an explicit NULL value will be permitted only when the column
>> allows
>> nulls.
>>
>> --
>> Hope this helps.
>> Dan Guzman
>> SQL Server MVP
>> "Oskar" <Oskar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:D50EF76B-BF46-4B49-9AD9-07364BF75E8A@.microsoft.com...
>> > Hi,
>> > In Microsoft SQL Server 2000 SP3 are there any potential drawbacks of
>> > changing the table column nullability via the ALTER TABLE ALTER COLUMN
>> > while
>> > a default is also defined for that column? If yes, what are they?
>> >
>> > --
>> > Many thanks,
>> > Oskar
>> >
>> >
>>
订阅：
博文 (Atom)