|
 Hi my gurus,
I follow step by step to do merge replication function at http://www.codeproject.com/database/MergeReplication.asp[^] but after executting, in Publistion database automatic adding conflict_... tables and MSmerge_... tables, sysmerge... tables in Subcriber database. These destroyed my database structure, so they can't to use for my application program. Tell me the way to merge but don't create anything in the database except datas. Thanks !!! Or anyOne to know another way to synchronize data between different locations, pls tell me. Thanks a lot !!!
|
|
|
|
|
Those tables are needed by the merge process to keep track of merge progress and problems.
Your application should not care about those tables and should gracefully ignore them. Any application that can't tolereate tables that it has no concern with is badly designed.
Yor data structures should have remained untouched (i.e. no changes to your application tables). It is not unusual for system proccesses tocreate additional tables in a database to support that process, and as long as no existing structures are changed, that should be transparent to any applications using the database. Sounds like you made an unfounded design assumption when you designed your application...
Absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power
Eric Hoffer
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
Edmund Burke
|
|
|
|
|
The application is SAP B1, I'm not design. When I use Snapshot function, it's ok, but merge it can't. Do you know why ??? 
-- modified at 3:06 Thursday 9th March, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
I have a strange problem when trying to register SQL Server 2000 with other pc that same network with mine. i have problem related to SQL Server
registration problems.
Doing a SQL Server registration on localhost works.
i have create a new user at pc A with sql authentication. then at pc B i try new sql server registration there.
When trying to register the same SQL Server on an Enterprise Manager
installed on pc B the registration fails with message:
"Login failed for user '(null)'. Reason: Not
associated with a trusted SQL Server connection"
but when i do it the same way at my University lab , it work. when i do at my own house it fail
Any ideas out there what causes this? Thanks a lot!
chung
|
|
|
|
|
Are the "lab" pc's in a domain and the 'home' ones not?
if in a workgroup, does the accout you are using exist on both machines and have exactly the same password?
Integrated security expects the logon account to be either a trusted domain account, or if in workgroups to be identical on all machines (same username spelling, same password)
Absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power
Eric Hoffer
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
Edmund Burke
|
|
|
|
|
I install local at my home pc. i think is that problem lah,cause the the username and password is exactly same.
I will try reinstall my sql server and other pc also.
thank Rob Graham
chung
|
|
|
|
|
hi all,
I am using Sql Server 2000.
using 'SQL Query Analyser' I have try to convert DateTime ..But It is failed..
please kindly help me.
this is the code part I tried:-
declare @stdate VARCHAR(20)
set @stdate='12/05/05'
select convert(DATETIME,@stdate,103)
Error:-Syntax error converting datetime from character string.
I have received data like @stdate ,So I need to convert it to DateTime and insert for DateTime Column in SQL Server Table.
So How I avoid Error and do Conversion?
thanks in advance..
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
why ur not sending stdate as '12/05/2005' from ur application??
anyway it's ur choice........i think this may work for u........(though this will assume ur current year>=2000)
declare @stdate VARCHAR(20)
set @stdate='12/05/05'
select convert(DATETIME,SUBSTRING(@stdate,1,6) + '20' + SUBSTRING(@stdate,7,2),103)
Regards,
Ritesh
|
|
|
|
|
Try:
Select cast(@stdate as varchar(20)) as datetime
instead of using convert
Jonathan
|
|
|
|
|
declare @stdate VARCHAR(20)
set @stdate='12/05/05'
select cast(@stdate as varchar )as datetime
"Every morning I check Forbes 40 richest Indians list , if i'm not there I go to work."
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
I'm having trouble putting my question into words, so if it sounds funny, i'm sorry. But here goes...
I've created a View in SQL that contains all the info i need from the different tables i have. The view contains Example:
TransactionDate, StaffID, StaffName, BrandID, BrandName, TotalCash, TotalQty
2006/03/01, 1, Jan, 2, Loreal, 250, 10
2006/03/01, 1, Jan, 3, Kerastase, 200, 8
2006/03/01, 2, Koos, 1, Revlon, 200, 11
2006/03/01, 2, Koos, 2, Loreal, 290, 12
2006/03/02, 1, Jan, 1, Revlon, 500, 25
2006/03/02, 1, Jan, 3, Kerastase, 345, 15
2006/03/03, 1, Jan, 3, Kerastase, 100, 6
2006/03/04, 2, Koos, 1, Revlon, 120, 3
With this examle jou see that i've calculated the totals on the TransactionDate for each Staffmember for each Brand.
I want to know if it is possible to write a procedure in SQL and send from C# a DateValue and BrandID to SQL to let the procedure know that it should only do the calculation between a specified Date and on every Brand. I need One total for each brand between the specified date: example 2006/03/01 - 2006/03/03.
I can do the calculation in C# but i need to speed up the processing time by using the database to do the calculation and not the application we wrote. Would Using a procedure in SQL actually speed up the Process or Would our application still run more or less the same time because it has to send a value to the database and wait for the calculation to complete and get the Value back from the Database?
I need to know rather urgantly Please. Thank you in advance.
-- modified at 5:29 Tuesday 7th March, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
you can pass the brand id and the two dates from yours c# application and in sql procedure use them as parameters and write like
select sum (column nmae) from table name where date<d1 and="" date="">d2 group by brand id
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All!!
I was browsing through that ASPNET database that .NET adds to your application, and in the membership table there are 2 password fields. The values seem to be both encrypted. One field is called Password, and the other is PasswordSalt. What is the difference between the 2? Are both required?
Thanks
Brendan
|
|
|
|
|
ma se wrote: What is the difference between the 2?
The password is a salted-hash. The PasswordSalt is the salt value used by the hashing algorithm (and I'll get to what that is in a moment). Basically the idea is that a dictionary could be built containing a set of common passwords and their corresponding hash values. This makes reversing the database very easy. A hash is a one-way encryption of some data, you cannot take the hashed value in the Password column and reverse it in to the original password (hence the need for a dictionary to be built).
Now, there is also the scenario that Alice and Mallory are users on a system. Unknown to each other they have chosen the same password. The hash values of that password will be the same. If Mallory happens to see the table in the database and sees that the hash value for his password and Alice's password are the same, he can conclude that they both have the same password and he can then malliciously gain access to Alice's account. This is bad.
So, to reduce the effectiveness of a dictionary attack and the consequence of happening to have the same password as some other user you can add a salt value to the password. This effectively adds a random element that makes the resulting hash values very different.
The salt can be known as it gives no real benefit to the attacker. The dictionary is useless because it would have to be regenerated by adding the salt value on to each plain text value and re-hashing it and then comparing the hash values. So, the effect is back to doing a brute force attack which is slow.
ma se wrote: Are both required?
Yes, both are required. When a user types a password, the known salt is added to it and it is then hashed. The hash value in the database is compared with the hash value generated by the user input+salt. If the salted hash values match then the user can be given access. If you take away the salt values then the user cannot be authenticated.
Does this help?
ColinMackay.net
Scottish Developers are looking for speakers for user group sessions over the next few months. Do you want to know more?
|
|
|
|
|
It does help in a way yes, but I'm going to need to do some more research on this topic.
How does one add the salt?
What is a good algorithym to use? I read that MD5 and SHA1 can be cracked, and that a newer SHA2 is being used. Is it really that better? Do you maybe know where I can find .NET code for hashing a password using SHA2?
Take care!!
|
|
|
|
|
ma se wrote: How does one add the salt?
I presume that in ASP.NET 2.0 there is code to do this for you in the new controls. However, you may like to read this thread[^] to see a similar answer I gave some time ago in response to an article I wrote.
ma se wrote: I read that MD5 and SHA1 can be cracked
Not so much that they can be cracked, as I remember, but that it was found that there were many collisions. i.e. Two different passwords producing the same hash value.
ColinMackay.net
Scottish Developers are looking for speakers for user group sessions over the next few months. Do you want to know more?
|
|
|
|
|
Oracled 8i DB hosted on Windows 2000 server is used by PowerBuilder application. this application tries to get data from oracle 9i on sun solaris using DBlink. on this scenario am getting "tns timed out". i tried removing the hot fix KB901214 from the windows server. but still facing the issue. can anyone help?
thanks in advance
|
|
|
|
|
Can anyone tell me how to insert a clob into oracle. I need to upload a document and insert it into a clob column
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Hello guys!
In my database I need to be able to update my data. Funny huh? 
Well I thought if it was possible to create a stored procedure, that only updates the data supplied by the program. So any data not supplied, would simply stay untouched.
An example. We have a table "Persons". The columns are: "PersonId", "FirstName", "LastName", "Age".
Now little Lisa has a birthday, and we need to change her age. So instead of supplying the SP with all the data of Lisa. I would like to be able to only supply the new value of "Age", and of course the "PersonId" for identification. All other values should remain the same.
But some day little Lisa gets married, and we need to change her last name. At that time, I would like to supply the same SP with only the new value "LastName", and all the other data should remain the same.
Is this possible? Or is it just not the way to do things?
Best regards
Soeren
|
|
|
|
|
Why not just create two stored procedures? say ChangeAge and ChangeLastName
You could create some dynamic SQL in a stored procedure and execute a varchar, but you are getting into the territory of opening yourself up to security risks (like SQL Injection Attacks). It is better, if you can, to use a solution that does not involve dynamic SQL. If you do have to use it then you need to implement extra safe guards to prevent an attack.
ColinMackay.net
Scottish Developers are looking for speakers for user group sessions over the next few months. Do you want to know more?
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
I also think Colin's idea is good.
well-done Colin.
regards,
chandana
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I am using MS SQL SERVER and trying to insert data into a table in which i have a column of varchar type and size is set to 7000, but my problem arises when i have data of length greater than 7000. It gives me an error thereby not inserting records into the database.
Can someone please suggest on how to go about this problem? Can i break data and store it in multiple rows?
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
smadan wrote: I am using MS SQL SERVER and trying to insert data into a table in which i have a column of varchar type and size is set to 7000, but my problem arises when i have data of length greater than 7000. It gives me an error thereby not inserting records into the database.
Of course, SQL Server has been told to expect a maximum of 7000 characters.
smadan wrote: Can someone please suggest on how to go about this problem?
You could use a text column type, it allows up to 2Gb of characters.
smadan wrote: Can i break data and store it in multiple rows?
Yes, but I'd recommend you use the text column type. If you are using SQL Server 2005 you can also use varchar(max)
ColinMackay.net
Scottish Developers are looking for speakers for user group sessions over the next few months. Do you want to know more?
|
|
|
|
|
Colin Angus Mackay wrote: Of course, SQL Server has been told to expect a maximum of 7000 characters.
I think it is 8000
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
