I'm basically a newbie; I understand the concepts of basic computer
management, databases, networks, and programming. But, I'm not experienced
in Sequel or MSDE.
I'm helping a friend who recently purchased a small service business (a
sports gym) that manages all the membership details using software that uses
MSDE. The current club management software is about 4 years old, it's
limping along without too many problems. The company that wrote the
software didn't survive the .com implosion, so I have very little
information on the product nor anyone to ask.
If his server was to die, he'd be SOL. I want to start 'backing up' the
data in a format I can use to import into potential replacement software (I
have no way to recreate the existing environment).
Is this possible? Without any information on the database (names,
passwords, field, layout, etc), is it possible to create a flat file that
contains the basic membership data (names, address, status, membership type,
etc). (the existing software does not have this capability) I'm assuming
that the future software will allow me to import such a file. I this too
big of a task for a newbie?
Thanks for your time in advance...
It is definitely doable. You need some very basic knowledge on SQL
Server/MSDE. MSDE is a free version of SQL Server, so your problem is MSDE
does not come with a GUI tool. However, armed with basic SQL Server/MSDE
knowledge, you can use Access to connect to MSDE (either *.mdb or *.adp
file), and to view/modify/export data in the said MSDE database.
"The Dodger" <someone@.somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:%23EVc37K4FHA.2352@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I'm basically a newbie; I understand the concepts of basic computer
> management, databases, networks, and programming. But, I'm not
> experienced in Sequel or MSDE.
> I'm helping a friend who recently purchased a small service business (a
> sports gym) that manages all the membership details using software that
> uses MSDE. The current club management software is about 4 years old,
> it's limping along without too many problems. The company that wrote the
> software didn't survive the .com implosion, so I have very little
> information on the product nor anyone to ask.
> If his server was to die, he'd be SOL. I want to start 'backing up' the
> data in a format I can use to import into potential replacement software
> (I have no way to recreate the existing environment).
> Is this possible? Without any information on the database (names,
> passwords, field, layout, etc), is it possible to create a flat file that
> contains the basic membership data (names, address, status, membership
> type, etc). (the existing software does not have this capability) I'm
> assuming that the future software will allow me to import such a file. I
> this too big of a task for a newbie?
> Thanks for your time in advance...
>
>
sql
Showing posts with label programming. Show all posts
Showing posts with label programming. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Do I need a Primary Key?
I am programming a site in ASP. I am used to using Access which forces you
to have a Primary Key. However, I am learning to use SQL which does not
seem to force you to have a Primary Key. Do I really need one? Please let
me know and why. Thanks!!Techniclly speaking you don't need one, but I would consider any table
without a primary key poor design.
The main reason you need one is that the primary key guarantees you'll have
a column in your table that you can use to uniquely identify each record.
Without a primary key you could potentialy end up with multiple identical
records in your table which you're not able to identify individualy using a
select, update or delete statement.
HTH
Karl Gram
http://www.gramonline.com
"michaaal" <res0gyio@.verizon.net> wrote in message
news:O6$6#0iDEHA.3784@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I am programming a site in ASP. I am used to using Access which forces
you
> to have a Primary Key. However, I am learning to use SQL which does not
> seem to force you to have a Primary Key. Do I really need one? Please
let
> me know and why. Thanks!!
>|||Hi,
To add on to old post,
1. Enforce uniqueness for values entered in specified columns
2. Will not allow nulls.
3. If you define a primary key for a table in your database, you can relate
that table to other tables, thus reducing the need for redundant data.
This will allow you to have Parent child relation ship with out writing
code.
4. This will allow you to do Cascading (Refer boks inline)
Always for a better database modelling we should enforce Primary key /
Foregn key concept.
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Karl Gram" <NOSPAMkarl@.gramonline.nl> wrote in message
news:#FrwxMkDEHA.2600@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Techniclly speaking you don't need one, but I would consider any table
> without a primary key poor design.
> The main reason you need one is that the primary key guarantees you'll
have
> a column in your table that you can use to uniquely identify each record.
> Without a primary key you could potentialy end up with multiple identical
> records in your table which you're not able to identify individualy using
a
> select, update or delete statement.
> --
> HTH
> Karl Gram
> http://www.gramonline.com
> "michaaal" <res0gyio@.verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:O6$6#0iDEHA.3784@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> you
> let
>|||> 3. If you define a primary key for a table in your database, you can
relate
> that table to other tables, thus reducing the need for redundant data.
> This will allow you to have Parent child relation ship with out
writing
> code.
The above statement brings on another question I had... Do I really
WANT to do this type of thing on the SQL server level? Or do I
want to do this type of thing in my code. My first inclination is to do
it in the code, however, I have not really sat down and researched the
possible speed differences. Any comments on this? Thank you!|||"michaaal" <res0gyio@.verizon.net> wrote in message
news:eRB$WFlDEHA.3980@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> relate
> writing
> The above statement brings on another question I had... Do I really
> WANT to do this type of thing on the SQL server level? Or do I
> want to do this type of thing in my code. My first inclination is to do
> it in the code, however, I have not really sat down and researched the
> possible speed differences. Any comments on this? Thank you!
Enforcing constraints in the code means that they will only be enforced in
your code. If someone uses Access or similar to access your database
directly they can by-pass all your constraints and wreak havoc.
It is also (IMHO) easier to document and troubleshoot. The constraints are
there as part of your table definition. All your data-centric info is in
one place.
As for speed, if you have the contsraints in SQL Server the optimizer and
can make informed decisions on how best to optimize the queries. Otherwise
in the code you will have to decide how to join the data, which is either
going to be very complicated, or not the best method in every circumstance.
Finally, and this is more a judgement on my programming skills than yours,
constraints work pretty much the way it says on the box. If you are
hand-coding all this, then bugs can creep in, you may not foresee every
eventuality, etc.
So my vote is for data-centric rules to be in the data tier.
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.614 / Virus Database: 393 - Release Date: 05/03/2004|||No, you should always enforce constraints at the DATA level. Enforcing them
in the code means that your data can become corrupt by someone simply
bypassing your application (e.g. running an insert/update/delete from Query
Analyzer).
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
http://www.aspfaq.com/
"michaaal" <res0gyio@.verizon.net> wrote in message
news:eRB$WFlDEHA.3980@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> relate
> writing
> The above statement brings on another question I had... Do I really
> WANT to do this type of thing on the SQL server level? Or do I
> want to do this type of thing in my code. My first inclination is to do
> it in the code, however, I have not really sat down and researched the
> possible speed differences. Any comments on this? Thank you!
>
>|||RE/
>No, you should always enforce constraints at the DATA level. Enforcing the
m
>in the code means that your data can become corrupt by someone simply
>bypassing your application (e.g. running an insert/update/delete from Query
>Analyzer).
Do you prefer to enforce RI via triggers or the other way?
"Other way" because I don't know enough go spell it out...Converted a few MS
Access DBs and wound up with triggers - so that's all I know. MSDN Univers
al
coming soon - so I guess I'll get the option to go either way via MS Visio's
DB
design tool...
--
PeteCresswell|||No, triggers can be pretty poor for performance, depending on other
circumstances. I prefer traditional primary/foreign key relationships, then
violations are stopped in their tracks rather than after the fact.
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
http://www.aspfaq.com/
"(Pete Cresswell)" <x@.y.z> wrote in message
news:k2op50heohj4o6j7tkgp05o7gk61hf1eue@.
4ax.com...
> RE/
> Do you prefer to enforce RI via triggers or the other way?
> "Other way" because I don't know enough go spell it out...Converted a few
> MS
> Access DBs and wound up with triggers - so that's all I know. MSDN
> Universal
> coming soon - so I guess I'll get the option to go either way via MS
> Visio's DB
> design tool...
> --
> PeteCresswell
to have a Primary Key. However, I am learning to use SQL which does not
seem to force you to have a Primary Key. Do I really need one? Please let
me know and why. Thanks!!Techniclly speaking you don't need one, but I would consider any table
without a primary key poor design.
The main reason you need one is that the primary key guarantees you'll have
a column in your table that you can use to uniquely identify each record.
Without a primary key you could potentialy end up with multiple identical
records in your table which you're not able to identify individualy using a
select, update or delete statement.
HTH
Karl Gram
http://www.gramonline.com
"michaaal" <res0gyio@.verizon.net> wrote in message
news:O6$6#0iDEHA.3784@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I am programming a site in ASP. I am used to using Access which forces
you
> to have a Primary Key. However, I am learning to use SQL which does not
> seem to force you to have a Primary Key. Do I really need one? Please
let
> me know and why. Thanks!!
>|||Hi,
To add on to old post,
1. Enforce uniqueness for values entered in specified columns
2. Will not allow nulls.
3. If you define a primary key for a table in your database, you can relate
that table to other tables, thus reducing the need for redundant data.
This will allow you to have Parent child relation ship with out writing
code.
4. This will allow you to do Cascading (Refer boks inline)
Always for a better database modelling we should enforce Primary key /
Foregn key concept.
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Karl Gram" <NOSPAMkarl@.gramonline.nl> wrote in message
news:#FrwxMkDEHA.2600@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Techniclly speaking you don't need one, but I would consider any table
> without a primary key poor design.
> The main reason you need one is that the primary key guarantees you'll
have
> a column in your table that you can use to uniquely identify each record.
> Without a primary key you could potentialy end up with multiple identical
> records in your table which you're not able to identify individualy using
a
> select, update or delete statement.
> --
> HTH
> Karl Gram
> http://www.gramonline.com
> "michaaal" <res0gyio@.verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:O6$6#0iDEHA.3784@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> you
> let
>|||> 3. If you define a primary key for a table in your database, you can
relate
> that table to other tables, thus reducing the need for redundant data.
> This will allow you to have Parent child relation ship with out
writing
> code.
The above statement brings on another question I had... Do I really
WANT to do this type of thing on the SQL server level? Or do I
want to do this type of thing in my code. My first inclination is to do
it in the code, however, I have not really sat down and researched the
possible speed differences. Any comments on this? Thank you!|||"michaaal" <res0gyio@.verizon.net> wrote in message
news:eRB$WFlDEHA.3980@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> relate
> writing
> The above statement brings on another question I had... Do I really
> WANT to do this type of thing on the SQL server level? Or do I
> want to do this type of thing in my code. My first inclination is to do
> it in the code, however, I have not really sat down and researched the
> possible speed differences. Any comments on this? Thank you!
Enforcing constraints in the code means that they will only be enforced in
your code. If someone uses Access or similar to access your database
directly they can by-pass all your constraints and wreak havoc.
It is also (IMHO) easier to document and troubleshoot. The constraints are
there as part of your table definition. All your data-centric info is in
one place.
As for speed, if you have the contsraints in SQL Server the optimizer and
can make informed decisions on how best to optimize the queries. Otherwise
in the code you will have to decide how to join the data, which is either
going to be very complicated, or not the best method in every circumstance.
Finally, and this is more a judgement on my programming skills than yours,
constraints work pretty much the way it says on the box. If you are
hand-coding all this, then bugs can creep in, you may not foresee every
eventuality, etc.
So my vote is for data-centric rules to be in the data tier.
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.614 / Virus Database: 393 - Release Date: 05/03/2004|||No, you should always enforce constraints at the DATA level. Enforcing them
in the code means that your data can become corrupt by someone simply
bypassing your application (e.g. running an insert/update/delete from Query
Analyzer).
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
http://www.aspfaq.com/
"michaaal" <res0gyio@.verizon.net> wrote in message
news:eRB$WFlDEHA.3980@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> relate
> writing
> The above statement brings on another question I had... Do I really
> WANT to do this type of thing on the SQL server level? Or do I
> want to do this type of thing in my code. My first inclination is to do
> it in the code, however, I have not really sat down and researched the
> possible speed differences. Any comments on this? Thank you!
>
>|||RE/
>No, you should always enforce constraints at the DATA level. Enforcing the
m
>in the code means that your data can become corrupt by someone simply
>bypassing your application (e.g. running an insert/update/delete from Query
>Analyzer).
Do you prefer to enforce RI via triggers or the other way?
"Other way" because I don't know enough go spell it out...Converted a few MS
Access DBs and wound up with triggers - so that's all I know. MSDN Univers
al
coming soon - so I guess I'll get the option to go either way via MS Visio's
DB
design tool...
--
PeteCresswell|||No, triggers can be pretty poor for performance, depending on other
circumstances. I prefer traditional primary/foreign key relationships, then
violations are stopped in their tracks rather than after the fact.
Aaron Bertrand
SQL Server MVP
http://www.aspfaq.com/
"(Pete Cresswell)" <x@.y.z> wrote in message
news:k2op50heohj4o6j7tkgp05o7gk61hf1eue@.
4ax.com...
> RE/
> Do you prefer to enforce RI via triggers or the other way?
> "Other way" because I don't know enough go spell it out...Converted a few
> MS
> Access DBs and wound up with triggers - so that's all I know. MSDN
> Universal
> coming soon - so I guess I'll get the option to go either way via MS
> Visio's DB
> design tool...
> --
> PeteCresswell
Monday, March 19, 2012
DMX from Java
My preferred programming language is Java (sorry Microsoft). I've searched for examples of running DMX queries into an Analysis Services database from Java but failed to locate any. I've seen suggestions that XMLA could be used but again, I can't locate any examples (in any language). For my current project I ran up the white flag and used C# instead but this wouldn't be an option in other cases. It would be possible to make the DMX calls from C# objects and call those from Java but that's pretty labourious to code.
Suggestions?
have you tried the XMLA Thin Client sample at http://www.sqlserverdatamining.com/DMCommunity/LiveSamples/124.aspx ?
|||I found that page but I didn't find any code sample to go with it.|||There's an old(er) code sample here http://www.sqlserverdatamining.com/DMCommunity/SQLServer2000/Links_LinkRedirector.aspx?id=96
DMO Programming
Hello All,
I'm learning SQL-DMO programming via VBScript and I'm new to VBScript
programming as well. Would anyone know
of a News Group exclusively for DMO programming ?
Thanks,
GopiAFAIK, there are no newsgroups. However, you might find some resources here
at: http://www.sqldev.net/sqldmo.htm
Anith|||You might want to know that DMO is "dead" as of SQL Server 2005. It will be
there, but at the 2000
level (new functionality for 2005 will not be exposed in DMO). The successor
of DMO is called SMO.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"rgn" <gopinathr@.healthasyst.com> wrote in message news:uOqqXX4vFHA.2132@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.g
bl...
> Hello All,
> I'm learning SQL-DMO programming via VBScript and I'm new to VBScript prog
ramming as well. Would
> anyone know
> of a News Group exclusively for DMO programming ?
> Thanks,
> Gopi
>|||Hello Tibor,
I saw the SQLServer 2005 CTP CD (DVD ?) in the office today and I will look
at it tomorrow in the office (I'm at home now).
I was going through the following link
"http://www.microsoft.com/sql/2005/productinfo/sql2005features.mspx" and I
was wondering :
[1] If the CTP CD contains Express Edition also.
[2] And which of these editions will I be able to install (I mean the
Database engine and not just the Client Side Tools)
in my XP Professional Workstation at the office.
Thanks for your suggestion :)
Gopi
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:uwIZLt4vFHA.2556@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> You might want to know that DMO is "dead" as of SQL Server 2005. It will
> be there, but at the 2000 level (new functionality for 2005 will not be
> exposed in DMO). The successor of DMO is called SMO.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "rgn" <gopinathr@.healthasyst.com> wrote in message
> news:uOqqXX4vFHA.2132@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>|||Tibor,
I think I found what I was looking for with respect to the "System
Requirements" from the following link.
http://download.microsoft.com/downl...sSQLEXP2005.htm
However, I'm not sure if the CD contains the Express Edition as well
Gopi
"gopi" <rgopinath@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23XJG2f6vFHA.724@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hello Tibor,
> I saw the SQLServer 2005 CTP CD (DVD ?) in the office today and I will
> look at it tomorrow in the office (I'm at home now).
> I was going through the following link
> "http://www.microsoft.com/sql/2005/productinfo/sql2005features.mspx" and I
> was wondering :
> [1] If the CTP CD contains Express Edition also.
> [2] And which of these editions will I be able to install (I mean the
> Database engine and not just the Client Side Tools)
> in my XP Professional Workstation at the office.
> Thanks for your suggestion :)
> Gopi
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote
> in message news:uwIZLt4vFHA.2556@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>|||> However, I'm not sure if the CD contains the Express Edition as well
I'm sorry, I don't know that, since I don't have that CD. You might want to
post this on the beta
newsgroups...
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"gopi" <rgopinath@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:eYeK4l6vFHA.3688@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl.
.
> Tibor,
> I think I found what I was looking for with respect to the "System Require
ments" from the
> following link.
> http://download.microsoft.com/downl...sSQLEXP2005.htm
> However, I'm not sure if the CD contains the Express Edition as well
> Gopi
> "gopi" <rgopinath@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:%23XJG2f6vFHA.724@.TK2
MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
I'm learning SQL-DMO programming via VBScript and I'm new to VBScript
programming as well. Would anyone know
of a News Group exclusively for DMO programming ?
Thanks,
GopiAFAIK, there are no newsgroups. However, you might find some resources here
at: http://www.sqldev.net/sqldmo.htm
Anith|||You might want to know that DMO is "dead" as of SQL Server 2005. It will be
there, but at the 2000
level (new functionality for 2005 will not be exposed in DMO). The successor
of DMO is called SMO.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"rgn" <gopinathr@.healthasyst.com> wrote in message news:uOqqXX4vFHA.2132@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.g
bl...
> Hello All,
> I'm learning SQL-DMO programming via VBScript and I'm new to VBScript prog
ramming as well. Would
> anyone know
> of a News Group exclusively for DMO programming ?
> Thanks,
> Gopi
>|||Hello Tibor,
I saw the SQLServer 2005 CTP CD (DVD ?) in the office today and I will look
at it tomorrow in the office (I'm at home now).
I was going through the following link
"http://www.microsoft.com/sql/2005/productinfo/sql2005features.mspx" and I
was wondering :
[1] If the CTP CD contains Express Edition also.
[2] And which of these editions will I be able to install (I mean the
Database engine and not just the Client Side Tools)
in my XP Professional Workstation at the office.
Thanks for your suggestion :)
Gopi
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:uwIZLt4vFHA.2556@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> You might want to know that DMO is "dead" as of SQL Server 2005. It will
> be there, but at the 2000 level (new functionality for 2005 will not be
> exposed in DMO). The successor of DMO is called SMO.
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>
> "rgn" <gopinathr@.healthasyst.com> wrote in message
> news:uOqqXX4vFHA.2132@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>|||Tibor,
I think I found what I was looking for with respect to the "System
Requirements" from the following link.
http://download.microsoft.com/downl...sSQLEXP2005.htm
However, I'm not sure if the CD contains the Express Edition as well
Gopi
"gopi" <rgopinath@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23XJG2f6vFHA.724@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hello Tibor,
> I saw the SQLServer 2005 CTP CD (DVD ?) in the office today and I will
> look at it tomorrow in the office (I'm at home now).
> I was going through the following link
> "http://www.microsoft.com/sql/2005/productinfo/sql2005features.mspx" and I
> was wondering :
> [1] If the CTP CD contains Express Edition also.
> [2] And which of these editions will I be able to install (I mean the
> Database engine and not just the Client Side Tools)
> in my XP Professional Workstation at the office.
> Thanks for your suggestion :)
> Gopi
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote
> in message news:uwIZLt4vFHA.2556@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>|||> However, I'm not sure if the CD contains the Express Edition as well
I'm sorry, I don't know that, since I don't have that CD. You might want to
post this on the beta
newsgroups...
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"gopi" <rgopinath@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:eYeK4l6vFHA.3688@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl.
.
> Tibor,
> I think I found what I was looking for with respect to the "System Require
ments" from the
> following link.
> http://download.microsoft.com/downl...sSQLEXP2005.htm
> However, I'm not sure if the CD contains the Express Edition as well
> Gopi
> "gopi" <rgopinath@.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:%23XJG2f6vFHA.724@.TK2
MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)