More problems with hidden parameters

I've read that in SP1, it should be possible to hide a parameter without
blanking the prompt and therefore making it read only.
I have attempted to do this in the recommended way, i.e. by unticking the
"prompt user" check box for the parameter within report manager and
leaving the prompt with a value in it. However, when I then try to pass a
value for the parameter at runtime via a URL I get the error "Parameter1 is
read-only and cannot be modified".
N.B. I notice that when I then go back into the properties of the report,
the prompt for the parameter has been
changed from what it originally was to "Parameter1:" which is the name of
the parameter. I should also mention that this report is running against a
Sybase database.This is the defined behavior. If the 'prompt user' check box is not checked
then the parameter value can never be passed in, not via URL or SOAP. If
the parameter is marked 'prompt user' but it has no prompt string then the
Report Server toolbar will not prompt for the parameter and the parameter
can be passed in. If the 'prompt user' check box is check and there is a
prompt string then the Report Server toolbar will prompt the user and the
value can be passed in.
Does that help?
--
-Daniel
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"GML" <g_m_lowe@.hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:#9sQcGIgEHA.2020@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I've read that in SP1, it should be possible to hide a parameter without
> blanking the prompt and therefore making it read only.
> I have attempted to do this in the recommended way, i.e. by unticking the
> "prompt user" check box for the parameter within report manager and
> leaving the prompt with a value in it. However, when I then try to pass a
> value for the parameter at runtime via a URL I get the error "Parameter1
is
> read-only and cannot be modified".
> N.B. I notice that when I then go back into the properties of the report,
> the prompt for the parameter has been
> changed from what it originally was to "Parameter1:" which is the name of
> the parameter. I should also mention that this report is running against
a
> Sybase database.
>
>|||Actually that helps me, wished I'd found this one before posting my own
question.
I should add that this is not the way the readme for SP1 suggests it should
work, it says that previously removing the check from the Promp User used to
make the parameter read only, but this behaviour has changed.
Regards
Mike Hanson
"Daniel Reib [MSFT]" wrote:
> This is the defined behavior. If the 'prompt user' check box is not checked
> then the parameter value can never be passed in, not via URL or SOAP. If
> the parameter is marked 'prompt user' but it has no prompt string then the
> Report Server toolbar will not prompt for the parameter and the parameter
> can be passed in. If the 'prompt user' check box is check and there is a
> prompt string then the Report Server toolbar will prompt the user and the
> value can be passed in.
> Does that help?
> --
> -Daniel
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
>
> "GML" <g_m_lowe@.hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:#9sQcGIgEHA.2020@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > I've read that in SP1, it should be possible to hide a parameter without
> > blanking the prompt and therefore making it read only.
> > I have attempted to do this in the recommended way, i.e. by unticking the
> > "prompt user" check box for the parameter within report manager and
> > leaving the prompt with a value in it. However, when I then try to pass a
> > value for the parameter at runtime via a URL I get the error "Parameter1
> is
> > read-only and cannot be modified".
> >
> > N.B. I notice that when I then go back into the properties of the report,
> > the prompt for the parameter has been
> > changed from what it originally was to "Parameter1:" which is the name of
> > the parameter. I should also mention that this report is running against
> a
> > Sybase database.
> >
> >
> >
>
>sql

More effiect update from linked server

I am updating data from a smaller linked table into a larger table (SQL
server 2K sp4, Win server 2k3 sp1) (data which had been inserted
previously). The update now looks like:
UPDATE tableA
SET colx = (select colx FROM linkedtableB rem
WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol),
coly = (select coly FROM linkedtableB rem
WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM linkedtableB as rem
WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
This seems to run an inordinately long time (in excess of 1hr + for
this one table, and I have to update 40 more tables). My question it,
what would be a more effiecient way to update this data? My reasoning
for updating this data is, while doing the insert earlier, I may have
gathered partial data during an operation, thus requiring an update at
some later point.
Any insight into a better solution would be greatly appriciated.
Daniel
danielp
try this one
UPDATE tableA SET colx =rem.colx , coly =rem.coly FROM linkedtableB rem
JOIN tableA ON
rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol
"danielp" <danielsmith611@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1162310539.241683.96330@.e3g2000cwe.googlegrou ps.com...
>I am updating data from a smaller linked table into a larger table (SQL
> server 2K sp4, Win server 2k3 sp1) (data which had been inserted
> previously). The update now looks like:
> UPDATE tableA
> SET colx = (select colx FROM linkedtableB rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol),
> coly = (select coly FROM linkedtableB rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
> WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM linkedtableB as rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
> This seems to run an inordinately long time (in excess of 1hr + for
> this one table, and I have to update 40 more tables). My question it,
> what would be a more effiecient way to update this data? My reasoning
> for updating this data is, while doing the insert earlier, I may have
> gathered partial data during an operation, thus requiring an update at
> some later point.
> Any insight into a better solution would be greatly appriciated.
> Daniel
>
|||Hi Daniel
Try
UPDATE A
SET colx = B.colx
coly = B.coly
FROM tableA A
JOIN linkedtableB B ON B.pkcol = A.pkcol
John
"danielp" wrote:

> I am updating data from a smaller linked table into a larger table (SQL
> server 2K sp4, Win server 2k3 sp1) (data which had been inserted
> previously). The update now looks like:
> UPDATE tableA
> SET colx = (select colx FROM linkedtableB rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol),
> coly = (select coly FROM linkedtableB rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
> WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM linkedtableB as rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
> This seems to run an inordinately long time (in excess of 1hr + for
> this one table, and I have to update 40 more tables). My question it,
> what would be a more effiecient way to update this data? My reasoning
> for updating this data is, while doing the insert earlier, I may have
> gathered partial data during an operation, thus requiring an update at
> some later point.
> Any insight into a better solution would be greatly appriciated.
> Daniel
>
|||I missed out a comma!
UPDATE A
SET colx = B.colx,
coly = B.coly
FROM tableA A
JOIN linkedtableB B ON B.pkcol = A.pkcol
John
"John Bell" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi Daniel
> Try
> UPDATE A
> SET colx = B.colx
> coly = B.coly
> FROM tableA A
> JOIN linkedtableB B ON B.pkcol = A.pkcol
> John
> "danielp" wrote:
|||Thanks Uri and John!
John Bell wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> I missed out a comma!
> UPDATE A
> SET colx = B.colx,
> coly = B.coly
> FROM tableA A
> JOIN linkedtableB B ON B.pkcol = A.pkcol
> John
> "John Bell" wrote:

More effiect update from linked server

I am updating data from a smaller linked table into a larger table (SQL
server 2K sp4, Win server 2k3 sp1) (data which had been inserted
previously). The update now looks like:
UPDATE tableA
SET colx = (select colx FROM linkedtableB rem
WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol),
coly = (select coly FROM linkedtableB rem
WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM linkedtableB as rem
WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
This seems to run an inordinately long time (in excess of 1hr + for
this one table, and I have to update 40 more tables). My question it,
what would be a more effiecient way to update this data? My reasoning
for updating this data is, while doing the insert earlier, I may have
gathered partial data during an operation, thus requiring an update at
some later point.
Any insight into a better solution would be greatly appriciated.
Danieldanielp
try this one
UPDATE tableA SET colx =rem.colx , coly =rem.coly FROM linkedtableB rem
JOIN tableA ON
rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol
"danielp" <danielsmith611@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1162310539.241683.96330@.e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>I am updating data from a smaller linked table into a larger table (SQL
> server 2K sp4, Win server 2k3 sp1) (data which had been inserted
> previously). The update now looks like:
> UPDATE tableA
> SET colx = (select colx FROM linkedtableB rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol),
> coly = (select coly FROM linkedtableB rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
> WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM linkedtableB as rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
> This seems to run an inordinately long time (in excess of 1hr + for
> this one table, and I have to update 40 more tables). My question it,
> what would be a more effiecient way to update this data? My reasoning
> for updating this data is, while doing the insert earlier, I may have
> gathered partial data during an operation, thus requiring an update at
> some later point.
> Any insight into a better solution would be greatly appriciated.
> Daniel
>|||Hi Daniel
Try
UPDATE A
SET colx = B.colx
coly = B.coly
FROM tableA A
JOIN linkedtableB B ON B.pkcol = A.pkcol
John
"danielp" wrote:

> I am updating data from a smaller linked table into a larger table (SQL
> server 2K sp4, Win server 2k3 sp1) (data which had been inserted
> previously). The update now looks like:
> UPDATE tableA
> SET colx = (select colx FROM linkedtableB rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol),
> coly = (select coly FROM linkedtableB rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
> WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM linkedtableB as rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
> This seems to run an inordinately long time (in excess of 1hr + for
> this one table, and I have to update 40 more tables). My question it,
> what would be a more effiecient way to update this data? My reasoning
> for updating this data is, while doing the insert earlier, I may have
> gathered partial data during an operation, thus requiring an update at
> some later point.
> Any insight into a better solution would be greatly appriciated.
> Daniel
>|||I missed out a comma!
UPDATE A
SET colx = B.colx,
coly = B.coly
FROM tableA A
JOIN linkedtableB B ON B.pkcol = A.pkcol
John
"John Bell" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Hi Daniel
> Try
> UPDATE A
> SET colx = B.colx
> coly = B.coly
> FROM tableA A
> JOIN linkedtableB B ON B.pkcol = A.pkcol
> John
> "danielp" wrote:
>|||Thanks Uri and John!
John Bell wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> I missed out a comma!
> UPDATE A
> SET colx = B.colx,
> coly = B.coly
> FROM tableA A
> JOIN linkedtableB B ON B.pkcol = A.pkcol
> John
> "John Bell" wrote:
>

More effiect update from linked server

I am updating data from a smaller linked table into a larger table (SQL
server 2K sp4, Win server 2k3 sp1) (data which had been inserted
previously). The update now looks like:
UPDATE tableA
SET colx = (select colx FROM linkedtableB rem
WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol),
coly = (select coly FROM linkedtableB rem
WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM linkedtableB as rem
WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
This seems to run an inordinately long time (in excess of 1hr + for
this one table, and I have to update 40 more tables). My question it,
what would be a more effiecient way to update this data? My reasoning
for updating this data is, while doing the insert earlier, I may have
gathered partial data during an operation, thus requiring an update at
some later point.
Any insight into a better solution would be greatly appriciated.
Danieldanielp
try this one
UPDATE tableA SET colx =rem.colx , coly =rem.coly FROM linkedtableB rem
JOIN tableA ON
rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol
"danielp" <danielsmith611@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1162310539.241683.96330@.e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>I am updating data from a smaller linked table into a larger table (SQL
> server 2K sp4, Win server 2k3 sp1) (data which had been inserted
> previously). The update now looks like:
> UPDATE tableA
> SET colx = (select colx FROM linkedtableB rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol),
> coly = (select coly FROM linkedtableB rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
> WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM linkedtableB as rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
> This seems to run an inordinately long time (in excess of 1hr + for
> this one table, and I have to update 40 more tables). My question it,
> what would be a more effiecient way to update this data? My reasoning
> for updating this data is, while doing the insert earlier, I may have
> gathered partial data during an operation, thus requiring an update at
> some later point.
> Any insight into a better solution would be greatly appriciated.
> Daniel
>|||Hi Daniel
Try
UPDATE A
SET colx = B.colx
coly = B.coly
FROM tableA A
JOIN linkedtableB B ON B.pkcol = A.pkcol
John
"danielp" wrote:
> I am updating data from a smaller linked table into a larger table (SQL
> server 2K sp4, Win server 2k3 sp1) (data which had been inserted
> previously). The update now looks like:
> UPDATE tableA
> SET colx = (select colx FROM linkedtableB rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol),
> coly = (select coly FROM linkedtableB rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
> WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM linkedtableB as rem
> WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
> This seems to run an inordinately long time (in excess of 1hr + for
> this one table, and I have to update 40 more tables). My question it,
> what would be a more effiecient way to update this data? My reasoning
> for updating this data is, while doing the insert earlier, I may have
> gathered partial data during an operation, thus requiring an update at
> some later point.
> Any insight into a better solution would be greatly appriciated.
> Daniel
>|||I missed out a comma!
UPDATE A
SET colx = B.colx,
coly = B.coly
FROM tableA A
JOIN linkedtableB B ON B.pkcol = A.pkcol
John
"John Bell" wrote:
> Hi Daniel
> Try
> UPDATE A
> SET colx = B.colx
> coly = B.coly
> FROM tableA A
> JOIN linkedtableB B ON B.pkcol = A.pkcol
> John
> "danielp" wrote:
> > I am updating data from a smaller linked table into a larger table (SQL
> > server 2K sp4, Win server 2k3 sp1) (data which had been inserted
> > previously). The update now looks like:
> >
> > UPDATE tableA
> > SET colx = (select colx FROM linkedtableB rem
> > WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol),
> > coly = (select coly FROM linkedtableB rem
> > WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
> > WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM linkedtableB as rem
> > WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
> >
> > This seems to run an inordinately long time (in excess of 1hr + for
> > this one table, and I have to update 40 more tables). My question it,
> > what would be a more effiecient way to update this data? My reasoning
> > for updating this data is, while doing the insert earlier, I may have
> > gathered partial data during an operation, thus requiring an update at
> > some later point.
> >
> > Any insight into a better solution would be greatly appriciated.
> >
> > Daniel
> >
> >|||Thanks Uri and John!
John Bell wrote:
> I missed out a comma!
> UPDATE A
> SET colx = B.colx,
> coly = B.coly
> FROM tableA A
> JOIN linkedtableB B ON B.pkcol = A.pkcol
> John
> "John Bell" wrote:
> > Hi Daniel
> >
> > Try
> >
> > UPDATE A
> > SET colx = B.colx
> > coly = B.coly
> > FROM tableA A
> > JOIN linkedtableB B ON B.pkcol = A.pkcol
> >
> > John
> >
> > "danielp" wrote:
> >
> > > I am updating data from a smaller linked table into a larger table (SQL
> > > server 2K sp4, Win server 2k3 sp1) (data which had been inserted
> > > previously). The update now looks like:
> > >
> > > UPDATE tableA
> > > SET colx = (select colx FROM linkedtableB rem
> > > WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol),
> > > coly = (select coly FROM linkedtableB rem
> > > WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
> > > WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM linkedtableB as rem
> > > WHERE rem.pkcol = tableA.pkcol)
> > >
> > > This seems to run an inordinately long time (in excess of 1hr + for
> > > this one table, and I have to update 40 more tables). My question it,
> > > what would be a more effiecient way to update this data? My reasoning
> > > for updating this data is, while doing the insert earlier, I may have
> > > gathered partial data during an operation, thus requiring an update at
> > > some later point.
> > >
> > > Any insight into a better solution would be greatly appriciated.
> > >
> > > Daniel
> > >
> > >sql

MOM Reporting Configuration Query?

My current environment is as follows:
MOM 2005 SP1 Frontend & DAS
MOM 2005 SP1 Frontend
MOM 2005 SP1 DB w/ SQL 2000 SP4
SQL Reporting Services 2000 w/ MOM 2005 SP1 Reporting Pack
Will applying SQL 2000 RS SP2 break MOM reporting?No it won't. Whilst the RTM MOM Reporting install complains if RS SP2 is
installed when you try and initially install MOM Reporting, if you apply SP2
after you have installed MOM Reporting it should be fine. I just tried this
and then added some new reports from a management pack and it worked fine.
The link below also has this quote that seems to confirm this
"With MOM 2005 Service Pack 1, you can use SQL 2000 Reporting Services SP2,
which is independent of service packs for SQL Server 2000."
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/mom/mom2005/Library/1e823712-c25b-4107-941d-e078f3937f3e.mspx
--
HTH,
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
http://www.sqldbatips.com
<damian.yates@.gtsi.com> wrote in message
news:1140192996.396977.158350@.g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> My current environment is as follows:
> MOM 2005 SP1 Frontend & DAS
> MOM 2005 SP1 Frontend
> MOM 2005 SP1 DB w/ SQL 2000 SP4
> SQL Reporting Services 2000 w/ MOM 2005 SP1 Reporting Pack
>
> Will applying SQL 2000 RS SP2 break MOM reporting?
>

MOM 2005 Reporting error

Hi

I m using MOM 2005 SP1 FR with MSSQL 2000 SP3 and i get this error on one of my reports :

Erreur de Reporting Services
--
Une erreur s'est produite lors du traitement du rapport. (rsProcessingAborted) Obtenir de l'aide en ligne
Impossible de lire la ligne de donnes suivante pour le dataset PerfAnalysis. (rsErrorReadingNextDataRow) Obtenir de l'aide en ligne
La conversion d'un type de donnes CHAR en type DATETIME a donn une valeur hors des limites des valeurs de date et d'heure.

--
Microsoft Reporting Services

What can i do, i think i must edit xml file ?

Regards.

I have exactly the same problem !
Did anyone have an idea ?

Regards.

MOM 2005 Reporting error

Hi

I m using MOM 2005 SP1 FR with MSSQL 2000 SP3 and i get this error on one of my reports :

Erreur de Reporting Services
--
Une erreur s'est produite lors du traitement du rapport. (rsProcessingAborted) Obtenir de l'aide en ligne
Impossible de lire la ligne de donnes suivante pour le dataset PerfAnalysis. (rsErrorReadingNextDataRow) Obtenir de l'aide en ligne
La conversion d'un type de donnes CHAR en type DATETIME a donn une valeur hors des limites des valeurs de date et d'heure.

--
Microsoft Reporting Services

What can i do, i think i must edit xml file ?

Regards.

I have exactly the same problem !
Did anyone have an idea ?

Regards.

MOM 2005 Reporting and Reporint Services SP1

Does anyone know if MOM 2005 Reporting works on Reporting Services SP1.I tried and it seems to work, you have any specific problems?
"Jeremy" wrote:
> Does anyone know if MOM 2005 Reporting works on Reporting Services SP1.

MOM 2005 Reporting

I'm trying to install the Mom Reporting service, My MOM 2005 (W2k3 w/sp1)
server also hosts the sql database (sql2000 w/sp3). While running the
install for the reporting services I get this error.
Failed to create data source for data warehouse, check to make sure you can
access the SQL services reporting server. (This is also hosted locally on
the mom server). Error code 2147467259.
Any one have any clues? I am NOT installing the report services to the same
folder as the mom2005 folder per microsoft. Any suggestions or guidance is
greatly appreciated.
Vid
--== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==--
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
--= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--Check your system requirements! 2003 SP1 is not mentioned, only 2003 RTM.
I had to:
1. uninstall SP1.
2. uninstall MOM web console
3. uninstall SRS
4. uninstall Application Services (IIS, ASP, etc.)
5. reinstall Application Services
6. reinstall MOM web console
7. reinstall SRS
8. reinstall MOM reporting services
Early indications are that this seems to have corrected the problem. Your
mileage may vary.
"dave@.xrxdc.com" wrote:
> I'm trying to install the Mom Reporting service, My MOM 2005 (W2k3 w/sp1)
> server also hosts the sql database (sql2000 w/sp3). While running the
> install for the reporting services I get this error.
> Failed to create data source for data warehouse, check to make sure you can
> access the SQL services reporting server. (This is also hosted locally on
> the mom server). Error code 2147467259.
> Any one have any clues? I am NOT installing the report services to the same
> folder as the mom2005 folder per microsoft. Any suggestions or guidance is
> greatly appreciated.
> Vid
> --== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==--
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
> --= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--
>|||Were you able to successfully install the MOM database itself? MOM is rather
picky when it comes to the order in which things are installed...
(1) Install MOM database after installing SQL 2000 w/SP3a
(2) Install MOM application
(3) Install SQL Reporting
As with previous reply - your mileage will vary.
"JerryW" wrote:
> Check your system requirements! 2003 SP1 is not mentioned, only 2003 RTM.
> I had to:
> 1. uninstall SP1.
> 2. uninstall MOM web console
> 3. uninstall SRS
> 4. uninstall Application Services (IIS, ASP, etc.)
> 5. reinstall Application Services
> 6. reinstall MOM web console
> 7. reinstall SRS
> 8. reinstall MOM reporting services
> Early indications are that this seems to have corrected the problem. Your
> mileage may vary.
>
> --
> "dave@.xrxdc.com" wrote:
> > I'm trying to install the Mom Reporting service, My MOM 2005 (W2k3 w/sp1)
> > server also hosts the sql database (sql2000 w/sp3). While running the
> > install for the reporting services I get this error.
> > Failed to create data source for data warehouse, check to make sure you can
> > access the SQL services reporting server. (This is also hosted locally on
> > the mom server). Error code 2147467259.
> >
> > Any one have any clues? I am NOT installing the report services to the same
> > folder as the mom2005 folder per microsoft. Any suggestions or guidance is
> > greatly appreciated.
> >
> > Vid
> >
> > --== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==--
> > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
> > --= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--
> >