PacketSize

I am getting the error:
"General network error. Check your network documentation."
It occurrs when I write/update to MSDE 2000 using ADO.NET's SqlClient classe
s. It only occurrs when the record reaches a certain size (around 10K, or s
o) and only occurs in certain environments. Some XP and some Windows 2000 e
nvironments are OK, while o
thers give the error.
I am aware of the PacketSize property in the SqlConnection class, but as of
yet have not set it and have just relied on the default value.
I feel there is something in the .NET or the ADO providers' environment or c
onfigurations that I am not aware of, and would appreciate any help in this
regard.Perhaps try turning off connection pooling (229564)
Bern
"Paul Wicks" <paulwicks@.htninc.com> wrote in message
news:6BAB551B-AC85-4D1C-8B41-89A79A719C81@.microsoft.com...
> I am getting the error:
> "General network error. Check your network documentation."
> It occurrs when I write/update to MSDE 2000 using ADO.NET's SqlClient
classes. It only occurrs when the record reaches a certain size (around
10K, or so) and only occurs in certain environments. Some XP and some
Windows 2000 environments are OK, while others give the error.
> I am aware of the PacketSize property in the SqlConnection class, but as
of yet have not set it and have just relied on the default value.
> I feel there is something in the .NET or the ADO providers' environment or
configurations that I am not aware of, and would appreciate any help in this
regard.
>|||Thanks for your suggestion, Bern.
I wish I could report good news, but the disabling of SQL Server connection
pooling had no effect.
I think I will leave it disabled to avoid possible future complications.

PacketSize

I am getting the error:
"General network error. Check your network documentation."
It occurrs when I write/update to MSDE 2000 using ADO.NET's SqlClient classes. It only occurrs when the record reaches a certain size (around 10K, or so) and only occurs in certain environments. Some XP and some Windows 2000 environments are OK, while o
thers give the error.
I am aware of the PacketSize property in the SqlConnection class, but as of yet have not set it and have just relied on the default value.
I feel there is something in the .NET or the ADO providers' environment or configurations that I am not aware of, and would appreciate any help in this regard.
Perhaps try turning off connection pooling (229564)
Bern
"Paul Wicks" <paulwicks@.htninc.com> wrote in message
news:6BAB551B-AC85-4D1C-8B41-89A79A719C81@.microsoft.com...
> I am getting the error:
> "General network error. Check your network documentation."
> It occurrs when I write/update to MSDE 2000 using ADO.NET's SqlClient
classes. It only occurrs when the record reaches a certain size (around
10K, or so) and only occurs in certain environments. Some XP and some
Windows 2000 environments are OK, while others give the error.
> I am aware of the PacketSize property in the SqlConnection class, but as
of yet have not set it and have just relied on the default value.
> I feel there is something in the .NET or the ADO providers' environment or
configurations that I am not aware of, and would appreciate any help in this
regard.
>
|||Thanks for your suggestion, Bern.
I wish I could report good news, but the disabling of SQL Server connection pooling had no effect.
I think I will leave it disabled to avoid possible future complications.

Package Update and Build Process

My SSIS solution has about hundred packages and time to time I have to edit a package. I understand I could use 'Build' command to compile only updated package, as opposed to Rebuild which recomplies all of the packages.

Nevertheless, in both cases SSIS opens all of the packages in design environment before compilation. My packages are saved in SourceSafe and that process takes quite long and I was wondering if there was any other way to compile only updated package where none of the other packages are opened during Build/Rebuild process? For example we could use dtutil to deploy only updated packages without running Package Installation Wizard.

Turn the of the "Build deployment Utility" option ala http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=874332&SiteID=1. With this option disabled, each package will cease opening every time you debug just one package via F5 or select the build project or build solution menu items.

For that matter, turn off the Integration Services project "Build" option in Visual Studio's Configuration Manager. SSIS in BIDS doesn't compile/build anything, but rather, copies your hundred .dtsx files to the project relative "bin\" subdirectory. Its doubtful you need four copies of each of the hundred packages, one each in source control, and three each in your local workspace, two of which are superflous (e.g. those copies in bin\ and bin\Deployment)

As you mentioned, use dtutil, or xcopy for that matter (if appropriate) for deployment, rather than the Package Installation Wizard. For example see http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=1828408&SiteID=1, wherein dtutil is used for SQL server deployment.

|||

Thanks very much, your suggested approach would save me painful waiting time I had to endure before.

Asaf

sql

package index server

I keep getting a message when I try to do a system update for my lenovo computer, which prevents me for using this utility. "the package index server is temporarily unavailabe, please try again later". Surprisingly, Lenovo could not provide me with any assistance in this matter.Confirm the SQL Server configuration and system too, i don't think this is related to SQL SErver.

overwrite a record on the subscriber

Hello. I have a table which I replicate to server B. Does it pose any
problems if I update the table Server B, then replication overlays the rows
a minute later? Someone told me that replicated tables keep track of the
last date/time the row was updated, but I thought that was only the
published table. Is this true?
Thank you,
Steve
You are free to update tables on the subscriber if the are part of a
transactional or snapshot publication.
With merge replication the change will make their way back to the publisher.
If you insert records with transactional replication on the subscriber you
may get a primary key violation. If you are ok with this, you can change
your profile of your distribution agent to continue on data consistency
errors. To do this expand Replication monitor in EM, expand the Replication
Agents folder, expand distribution agents folder, right click on your
distribution agent, and select agent profiles. Then select the continue on
data consistency errors profile. Stop and start your distribution agent.
Keep in mind you have lost database consistency between your publisher and
subscriber.
For most replication solutions this is NOT a good thing, but your particular
solution might benefit from it.
"SteveS" <ssinger@.trendmls.com> wrote in message
news:%23uznj2cFEHA.3080@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hello. I have a table which I replicate to server B. Does it pose any
> problems if I update the table Server B, then replication overlays the
rows
> a minute later? Someone told me that replicated tables keep track of the
> last date/time the row was updated, but I thought that was only the
> published table. Is this true?
> Thank you,
> Steve
>

Over-ride a trigger

I have a table which, until now had an update trigger only.
That trigger was used to record the record as it existed BEFORE the change,
and who made the change. It works fine.
Now I have a situation where a program will INSERT a row into the table
(which now has a new field). The value of the field is calculated. I have
two choices,
1) Re-write a lot of code to calculate the value before the insert
2) Write a simple insert trigger to calculate the value and update it in
the table.
Problem:
If I use the insert trigger to update the value, I am doing an update. The
update trigger will fire. I do not want the update trigger to fire when this
operation is performed.
Is there a way I can add code to the Insert trigger to tell it that when it
updates the value it should prevent the update trigger from firing'
Thanks.Roger,
If the value is calculated:
Can you use a calculated column?
Can you calculate the value in the select statement?
AMB
"Roger Twomey" wrote:

> I have a table which, until now had an update trigger only.
> That trigger was used to record the record as it existed BEFORE the change
,
> and who made the change. It works fine.
> Now I have a situation where a program will INSERT a row into the table
> (which now has a new field). The value of the field is calculated. I have
> two choices,
> 1) Re-write a lot of code to calculate the value before the insert
> 2) Write a simple insert trigger to calculate the value and update it i
n
> the table.
> Problem:
> If I use the insert trigger to update the value, I am doing an update. The
> update trigger will fire. I do not want the update trigger to fire when th
is
> operation is performed.
> Is there a way I can add code to the Insert trigger to tell it that when i
t
> updates the value it should prevent the update trigger from firing'
> Thanks.
>
>|||We cannot use a calculated column as the values must not change and the
values used to calculate can change over time.
We are currently using select statements that calculate but the process is
labourious and complex so we are trying to force consistent data with lower
cpu utilization (One insert is read many many times)
"Alejandro Mesa" <AlejandroMesa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B0B63AC0-5557-4C66-83DE-BBFC526E8C44@.microsoft.com...
> Roger,
> If the value is calculated:
> Can you use a calculated column?
> Can you calculate the value in the select statement?
>
> AMB
> "Roger Twomey" wrote:
>|||Roger,
If I understood, you calculate the value during the insert but you want it
to be static after it is done?, In this case you can stop the update trigger
.
...
if update(calculated_column) return
...
If you do not use bulk insert, then I would recommend to insert the row
using a stored procedure. If as you said, the calculation is labourious and
complex, doing it in a trigger will make the transaction longer and will
impact the performance of the engine and scalability of the db.
AMB
"Roger Twomey" wrote:

> We cannot use a calculated column as the values must not change and the
> values used to calculate can change over time.
> We are currently using select statements that calculate but the process is
> labourious and complex so we are trying to force consistent data with lowe
r
> cpu utilization (One insert is read many many times)
> "Alejandro Mesa" <AlejandroMesa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
e
> news:B0B63AC0-5557-4C66-83DE-BBFC526E8C44@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||That is true, but the impact will only occur on insert, not on every read.
"Alejandro Mesa" <AlejandroMesa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3CF33806-F33D-433E-8305-0450AF8E938B@.microsoft.com...
> Roger,
> If I understood, you calculate the value during the insert but you want it
> to be static after it is done?, In this case you can stop the update
> trigger.
> ...
> if update(calculated_column) return
> ...
> If you do not use bulk insert, then I would recommend to insert the row
> using a stored procedure. If as you said, the calculation is labourious
> and
> complex, doing it in a trigger will make the transaction longer and will
> impact the performance of the engine and scalability of the db.
>
> AMB
> "Roger Twomey" wrote:
>|||Thanks for the tip (If update(calculated_column) return)
I think that should work.
"Alejandro Mesa" <AlejandroMesa@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3CF33806-F33D-433E-8305-0450AF8E938B@.microsoft.com...
> Roger,
> If I understood, you calculate the value during the insert but you want it
> to be static after it is done?, In this case you can stop the update
> trigger.
> ...
> if update(calculated_column) return
> ...
> If you do not use bulk insert, then I would recommend to insert the row
> using a stored procedure. If as you said, the calculation is labourious
> and
> complex, doing it in a trigger will make the transaction longer and will
> impact the performance of the engine and scalability of the db.
>
> AMB
> "Roger Twomey" wrote:
>|||On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:07:46 -0500, Roger Twomey wrote:

>Thanks for the tip (If update(calculated_column) return)
>I think that should work.
Hi Roger,
That will only work if the calculated_column is never updated from other
sources than the insert trigger.
Other options to investigate are:
* Check if it's possible to disable nested triggers (note: this can only
be done at the server level; it will affect all databases on the
server).
* Checking the value of TRIGGER_NESTLEVEL() (or maybe even the value of
TRIGGER_NESTLEVEL(object_ID('upd_trigger
'))).
Best, Hugo
--
(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)

Overlapping Trigger Precedence

Hi,
What is the execution precedence if there exist more than one update, delete
or insert triggers
I mean if there are more than one type of trigger such as more than one
update trigger.
Also, Can we specify a precedence for them?
and last If we call an update statement in the same update trigger and for
the same table that has this trigger, Is the trigger considers itself, I
mean is it recurs or not, or is it disables itself for that execution period
?.
Thanks in advance...
Emre GuldoganThere is no guarantee as to what order they'll fire in.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.sqljunkies.com/weblog/amachanic
--
"Emre Guldogan" <ask me please...> wrote in message
news:e$KbhKMJFHA.656@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> What is the execution precedence if there exist more than one update,
delete
> or insert triggers
> I mean if there are more than one type of trigger such as more than one
> update trigger.
> Also, Can we specify a precedence for them?
> and last If we call an update statement in the same update trigger and for
> the same table that has this trigger, Is the trigger considers itself, I
> mean is it recurs or not, or is it disables itself for that execution
period
> ?.
> Thanks in advance...
> Emre Guldogan
>|||You can use sp_settriggerorder to define the first and last trigger to
execute. For the rest the order is undefined. If it matters to you then
put all the logic in one trigger.
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
--|||On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 18:11:48 +0200, "Emre Guldogan" <ask me please...>
wrote:

>What is the execution precedence if there exist more than one update, delet
e
>or insert triggers
>I mean if there are more than one type of trigger such as more than one
>update trigger.
>Also, Can we specify a precedence for them?
Hi Emre,
Already addressed by David and Adam.

>and last If we call an update statement in the same update trigger and for
>the same table that has this trigger, Is the trigger considers itself, I
>mean is it recurs or not, or is it disables itself for that execution perio
d
>?.
There are two options governing this:
1. Recursive triggers. If this is off, a trigger can't fire itself. So
if an update trigger on table AA performans an UPDATE AA command, that
specific trigger is not called. This disables only direct recursion: if
the update trigger on AA performs a DELETE FROM BB statement, and the
delete trigger on BB performs UPDATE AA, the trigger will be called
recursively.
The recursive triggers option is a database setting: it will affect all
triggers in the current database, but it won't affect other databases on
the same server. You use ALTER DATABASE to change it.
2. Nested triggers. If this is off, statements executed from a trigger
don't fire any trigger at all.
The nested triggers option is a server setting: it will affect all
triggers in all databases on the server. You use sp_configure to change
it.
Other options to prevent recursive execution of triggers for specific
triggers only are:
* TRIGGER_NESTLEVEL() - check this to find how many nested trigger
executions there currently are.
* TRGIGER_NESTLEVEL(object_ID('trigger_nam
e')) - check this to find how
many times the specified trigger is currently nested.
Best, Hugo
--
(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)