manage exception message

How to manage sql server runtime message to users understand it?

In my web form I added folowed code

If Session("Action") = "Edit" Then

Try

ObjectDataSource1.Update()

Catch ex As Exception

lblMessage.Text = ex.GetBaseException.Message

End Try

for manage user input for update the record.

This is message returned by sql server 2005

The UPDATE statement conflicted with the REFERENCE constraint "FK_DEVIZE_RELATION__DRZAVE". The conflict occurred in database "Trgo2006", table "dbo.Devize", column 'Drzava'. The statement has been terminated

This message not understand for users. How to manage messages retrned by sql server, or prepare exception to return message understanded for users.

YOu could build a generic wrapper class for Sqlexceptions like this one mentioned here:

http://weblogs.asp.net/guys/archive/2005/05/20/408142.aspx

HTH, jens Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de

Manage Data

Hello,
I am working on an ASP.NET web site using an SQL database.
Is there a way to Insert/Delete and Update data in the database
without creating all the forms in ASP.NET?
Since I am the only person to work with the database it would be
easier for me than creating all ASP.NET forms.
Thanks,
MiguelHi
Hmm, so get in SSMS and/or Query Builder and issue DML there.
"shapper" <mdmoura@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d128e2f4-c3fc-4873-b491-1ccc1ee40928@.t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> Hello,
> I am working on an ASP.NET web site using an SQL database.
> Is there a way to Insert/Delete and Update data in the database
> without creating all the forms in ASP.NET?
> Since I am the only person to work with the database it would be
> easier for me than creating all ASP.NET forms.
> Thanks,
> Miguel

Manage Data

Hello,
I am working on an ASP.NET web site using an SQL database.
Is there a way to Insert/Delete and Update data in the database
without creating all the forms in ASP.NET?
Since I am the only person to work with the database it would be
easier for me than creating all ASP.NET forms.
Thanks,
Miguel
Hi
Hmm, so get in SSMS and/or Query Builder and issue DML there.
"shapper" <mdmoura@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d128e2f4-c3fc-4873-b491-1ccc1ee40928@.t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> Hello,
> I am working on an ASP.NET web site using an SQL database.
> Is there a way to Insert/Delete and Update data in the database
> without creating all the forms in ASP.NET?
> Since I am the only person to work with the database it would be
> easier for me than creating all ASP.NET forms.
> Thanks,
> Miguel

Making report add in work

Good day

I have been trying to install some type of reporting service . I have found a add in for web developer 2005 express . I drag the nessesay onto my form from the tool box and data table , but when I test the application all I get is xml , like below. Have I left something out. sorry I forgot to add that I also get this error on the default page-

An error has occurred during report processing.

ObjectDataSource 'ObjectDataSource1' could not find a non-generic method 'GetDatabyShipsID' that has no parameters.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>

-<Report xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sqlserver/reporting/2005/01/reportdefinition" xmlns:rd="http://schemas.microsoft.com/SQLServer/reporting/reportdesigner">

-<DataSources>

-<DataSource Name="ConnectionString">

+<ConnectionProperties>

<ConnectString/>

<DataProvider>SQL</DataProvider>

</ConnectionProperties>

<rd:DataSourceID>baa3d63e-0dc9-43cf-9477-0040139b2ea1</rd:DataSourceID>

</DataSource>

</DataSources>

<BottomMargin>2.5cm</BottomMargin>

<RightMargin>2.5cm</RightMargin>

Hi;

Ok from the error message you are getting ie. "An error has occurred during report processing.

ObjectDataSource 'ObjectDataSource1' could not find a non-generic method 'GetDatabyShipsID' that has no parameters." the error seems to indicate that the datasource you are using (ObjectDataSOurce1) is supposed to call a method called "GetDatebyShipsID" that has no parameters. Check if you have that method and add select parameters to your datasource.

Making better queries

Hello,
I am in process of reworking a web application, that is quite data-base
intensive. Right now I am focused on the view that executes the highest
number of queries. Telling you the full picture would be very verbose - the
database structure is quite compex, etc. What I am looking for, is some kind
of buide, how to write a better queries. Why one approach is better than the
other.
For example, the decisions I face, are:
- What is the most effective way to get only subset of records from ordered
query where are tens of thousands elements? I need this to enable paging
through the recordset.
- Why executing many queries like "SELECT myField FROM myTable WHERE
id=nn", just changing nn, sometimes is faster than creating a query with
subquery like "SELECT (SELECT myField FROM myTable WHERE id=outTable.id)
FROM outTable where id in (...)"
- Or, perhaps, alternative to subquery is a join, like in "SELECT * FROM
outTable LEFT JOIN myTable ON outTable.id=myTable.id WHERE outTable.id in
(...)"
Well, I am sure there is no short answer to questions like this, therefore I
need some wisdom, maybe there is some online article about this? I came to
conclusion that I need serious theory to complete my work, because my local
SQL server here executes my "improved" queries faster than the old, but the
SQL server of the webhoster executes them slower than the old ones. It
escapes me, why there should be such a difference, given that the data and
indexes are exactly the same on the two databases.
I will be gratefuly for any hint.
Pavils>What is the most effective way to get only subset of records from ordered
>query where are tens of thousands elements? I need this to enable paging
>through the recordset.
> - Why executing many queries like "SELECT myField FROM myTable WHERE
>id=nn", just changing nn, sometimes is faster than creating a query with
>subquery like "SELECT (SELECT myField FROM myTable WHERE id=outTable.id)
>FROM outTable where id in (...)"
>- Or, perhaps, alternative to subquery is a join, like in "SELECT * FROM
>outTable LEFT JOIN myTable ON outTable.id=myTable.id WHERE outTable.id in
>(...)"
I'd say it depends on what your trying to accomplish. The frist query
is the fastest and the last query is good if the join is needed.
Otherwise don't use joins if you don't need too, unless necessary, try
to use inner joins.
Other considerations too look at when comparing performance of the two
servers is memory, hard drive types and speeds, location, cpu speed and
server load.|||Have you looked at the execution plan for each of the queries. that will
tell you what SQL Server is doing behind the scenes, which will tell you
which query is the most efficient to run.
"Izzy" wrote:

>
> I'd say it depends on what your trying to accomplish. The frist query
> is the fastest and the last query is good if the join is needed.
> Otherwise don't use joins if you don't need too, unless necessary, try
> to use inner joins.
> Other considerations too look at when comparing performance of the two
> servers is memory, hard drive types and speeds, location, cpu speed and
> server load.
>

Making better queries

Hello,
I am in process of reworking a web application, that is quite data-base
intensive. Right now I am focused on the view that executes the highest
number of queries. Telling you the full picture would be very verbose - the
database structure is quite compex, etc. What I am looking for, is some kind
of buide, how to write a better queries. Why one approach is better than the
other.
For example, the decisions I face, are:
- What is the most effective way to get only subset of records from ordered
query where are tens of thousands elements? I need this to enable paging
through the recordset.
- Why executing many queries like "SELECT myField FROM myTable WHERE
id=nn", just changing nn, sometimes is faster than creating a query with
subquery like "SELECT (SELECT myField FROM myTable WHERE id=outTable.id)
FROM outTable where id in (...)"
- Or, perhaps, alternative to subquery is a join, like in "SELECT * FROM
outTable LEFT JOIN myTable ON outTable.id=myTable.id WHERE outTable.id in
(...)"
Well, I am sure there is no short answer to questions like this, therefore I
need some wisdom, maybe there is some online article about this? I came to
conclusion that I need serious theory to complete my work, because my local
SQL server here executes my "improved" queries faster than the old, but the
SQL server of the webhoster executes them slower than the old ones. It
escapes me, why there should be such a difference, given that the data and
indexes are exactly the same on the two databases.
I will be gratefuly for any hint.
Pavils>What is the most effective way to get only subset of records from ordered
>query where are tens of thousands elements? I need this to enable paging
>through the recordset.
> - Why executing many queries like "SELECT myField FROM myTable WHERE
>id=nn", just changing nn, sometimes is faster than creating a query with
>subquery like "SELECT (SELECT myField FROM myTable WHERE id=outTable.id)
>FROM outTable where id in (...)"
>- Or, perhaps, alternative to subquery is a join, like in "SELECT * FROM
>outTable LEFT JOIN myTable ON outTable.id=myTable.id WHERE outTable.id in
>(...)"
I'd say it depends on what your trying to accomplish. The frist query
is the fastest and the last query is good if the join is needed.
Otherwise don't use joins if you don't need too, unless necessary, try
to use inner joins.
Other considerations too look at when comparing performance of the two
servers is memory, hard drive types and speeds, location, cpu speed and
server load.|||Have you looked at the execution plan for each of the queries. that will
tell you what SQL Server is doing behind the scenes, which will tell you
which query is the most efficient to run.
"Izzy" wrote:
> >What is the most effective way to get only subset of records from ordered
> >query where are tens of thousands elements? I need this to enable paging
> >through the recordset.
> > - Why executing many queries like "SELECT myField FROM myTable WHERE
> >id=nn", just changing nn, sometimes is faster than creating a query with
> >subquery like "SELECT (SELECT myField FROM myTable WHERE id=outTable.id)
> >FROM outTable where id in (...)"
> >- Or, perhaps, alternative to subquery is a join, like in "SELECT * FROM
> >outTable LEFT JOIN myTable ON outTable.id=myTable.id WHERE outTable.id in
> >(...)"
>
> I'd say it depends on what your trying to accomplish. The frist query
> is the fastest and the last query is good if the join is needed.
> Otherwise don't use joins if you don't need too, unless necessary, try
> to use inner joins.
> Other considerations too look at when comparing performance of the two
> servers is memory, hard drive types and speeds, location, cpu speed and
> server load.
>

Make the Login box go away!

I'm trying to incorporate the /ReportServer virtual into our application web
site so we can point the Report Viewer control to /ReportServer rather than
<default web site's IP>/ReportServer. I'm trying to remove authentication
from <app>/ReportServer, but I've been unable to keep it from popping up
that blasted login dialog box. I've briefly tried using the FormsAuth
sample and even rewrote it to always return True from all the authentication
functions, but neither solved my problem.
The application is under Forms Auth. I just want the ReportServer virtual
to run in that context. At this point, I don't even care if it's really
keeping authentication or just letting anyone who happens to type in
http://<our_app>/ReportServer go uncontested. It's extremely frustrating,
and it doesn't work for any users as it is now.
This is SQL Server Standard, so I don't know if custom security extensions
(assuming I really had any clue as to how they worked or how to set them up)
would even work (I came across a page that says only Enterprise supports
them).To my knowledge, for IE to give your windows authentication credentials
automatically to IIS, you have to adresse the website using a machine name.
Use something like http://computername/ReportServer
Suppose your server is named BigBox.leetdomain.com
Address it using http://BigBox/ReportServer
I never had to mess around with the report server security as we want
windows authentication and the report server will not be used externally. It
seems to be configured fine by default.
"DJM" wrote:
> I'm trying to incorporate the /ReportServer virtual into our application web
> site so we can point the Report Viewer control to /ReportServer rather than
> <default web site's IP>/ReportServer. I'm trying to remove authentication
> from <app>/ReportServer, but I've been unable to keep it from popping up
> that blasted login dialog box. I've briefly tried using the FormsAuth
> sample and even rewrote it to always return True from all the authentication
> functions, but neither solved my problem.
> The application is under Forms Auth. I just want the ReportServer virtual
> to run in that context. At this point, I don't even care if it's really
> keeping authentication or just letting anyone who happens to type in
> http://<our_app>/ReportServer go uncontested. It's extremely frustrating,
> and it doesn't work for any users as it is now.
> This is SQL Server Standard, so I don't know if custom security extensions
> (assuming I really had any clue as to how they worked or how to set them up)
> would even work (I came across a page that says only Enterprise supports
> them).
>
>|||The Forms Authentication sample from MSDN gives you instructions on how to
restore to default non-forms-authentication settings.
Basically, it's not recommended since you'll have to re-do your report
permissions. And if you don't have the original .config files backed up,
you'll have a VERY difficult time.
--
'(' Jeff A. Stucker
\
Business Intelligence
www.criadvantage.com
---
"DJM" <msnews@.puddlestheshark.com> wrote in message
news:e6Cz03NzEHA.2600@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> I'm trying to incorporate the /ReportServer virtual into our application
> web
> site so we can point the Report Viewer control to /ReportServer rather
> than
> <default web site's IP>/ReportServer. I'm trying to remove authentication
> from <app>/ReportServer, but I've been unable to keep it from popping up
> that blasted login dialog box. I've briefly tried using the FormsAuth
> sample and even rewrote it to always return True from all the
> authentication
> functions, but neither solved my problem.
> The application is under Forms Auth. I just want the ReportServer virtual
> to run in that context. At this point, I don't even care if it's really
> keeping authentication or just letting anyone who happens to type in
> http://<our_app>/ReportServer go uncontested. It's extremely frustrating,
> and it doesn't work for any users as it is now.
> This is SQL Server Standard, so I don't know if custom security extensions
> (assuming I really had any clue as to how they worked or how to set them
> up)
> would even work (I came across a page that says only Enterprise supports
> them).
>
>|||But the standard is Windows Authentication. I still get the
username/password dialog when trying to access a report via report viewer
control from my website.
"Jeff A. Stucker" <jeff@.mobilize.net> wrote in message
news:O$FUn9OzEHA.3708@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> The Forms Authentication sample from MSDN gives you instructions on how to
> restore to default non-forms-authentication settings.
> Basically, it's not recommended since you'll have to re-do your report
> permissions. And if you don't have the original .config files backed up,
> you'll have a VERY difficult time.
> --
> '(' Jeff A. Stucker
> \
> Business Intelligence
> www.criadvantage.com
> ---
> "DJM" <msnews@.puddlestheshark.com> wrote in message
> news:e6Cz03NzEHA.2600@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> I'm trying to incorporate the /ReportServer virtual into our application
>> web
>> site so we can point the Report Viewer control to /ReportServer rather
>> than
>> <default web site's IP>/ReportServer. I'm trying to remove
>> authentication
>> from <app>/ReportServer, but I've been unable to keep it from popping up
>> that blasted login dialog box. I've briefly tried using the FormsAuth
>> sample and even rewrote it to always return True from all the
>> authentication
>> functions, but neither solved my problem.
>> The application is under Forms Auth. I just want the ReportServer
>> virtual
>> to run in that context. At this point, I don't even care if it's really
>> keeping authentication or just letting anyone who happens to type in
>> http://<our_app>/ReportServer go uncontested. It's extremely
>> frustrating,
>> and it doesn't work for any users as it is now.
>> This is SQL Server Standard, so I don't know if custom security
>> extensions
>> (assuming I really had any clue as to how they worked or how to set them
>> up)
>> would even work (I came across a page that says only Enterprise supports
>> them).
>>
>|||And since the report server *is* being accessed externally, it's quite
definitely not fine for our needs.
"/dev/null" <devnull@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:2BD4677A-BEF2-4048-92B9-316F38813E85@.microsoft.com...
> To my knowledge, for IE to give your windows authentication credentials
> automatically to IIS, you have to adresse the website using a machine
> name.
> Use something like http://computername/ReportServer
> Suppose your server is named BigBox.leetdomain.com
> Address it using http://BigBox/ReportServer
> I never had to mess around with the report server security as we want
> windows authentication and the report server will not be used externally.
> It
> seems to be configured fine by default.
>
> "DJM" wrote:
>> I'm trying to incorporate the /ReportServer virtual into our application
>> web
>> site so we can point the Report Viewer control to /ReportServer rather
>> than
>> <default web site's IP>/ReportServer. I'm trying to remove
>> authentication
>> from <app>/ReportServer, but I've been unable to keep it from popping up
>> that blasted login dialog box. I've briefly tried using the FormsAuth
>> sample and even rewrote it to always return True from all the
>> authentication
>> functions, but neither solved my problem.
>> The application is under Forms Auth. I just want the ReportServer
>> virtual
>> to run in that context. At this point, I don't even care if it's really
>> keeping authentication or just letting anyone who happens to type in
>> http://<our_app>/ReportServer go uncontested. It's extremely
>> frustrating,
>> and it doesn't work for any users as it is now.
>> This is SQL Server Standard, so I don't know if custom security
>> extensions
>> (assuming I really had any clue as to how they worked or how to set them
>> up)
>> would even work (I came across a page that says only Enterprise supports
>> them).
>>
>>|||Ok, I've set Authentication mode="None", I've set the /ReportServer virtual
to allow Anonymous access as IUSR, I've granted IUSR_GROUP (local group
containing the IUSR, IWAM, and ASP.NET users) access to the \MSSQL\Reporting
Services\ReportServer folder (and files and subfolders), and I've granted
the IUSR_GROUP the Browser role to all reports.
So why, when using the Report Viewer web control, do I see a login box?!?|||Does anyone have any advice or suggestions here? I still haven't resolved
this.
"DJM" <msnews@.puddlestheshark.com> wrote in message
news:uLeyyLnzEHA.352@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Ok, I've set Authentication mode="None", I've set the /ReportServer
> virtual to allow Anonymous access as IUSR, I've granted IUSR_GROUP (local
> group containing the IUSR, IWAM, and ASP.NET users) access to the
> \MSSQL\Reporting Services\ReportServer folder (and files and subfolders),
> and I've granted the IUSR_GROUP the Browser role to all reports.
> So why, when using the Report Viewer web control, do I see a login box?!?
>|||You have two options:
1. Generating the report on the server side of the application by using the
Render SOAP API. The advantage of this approach is that it is more secure
since the user doesn't see the report URL (everything takes place on the
server). The tradeoff is that the interactive features (drilldown,
drillthrough, etc.) will not work with SOAP since their require direct
access to the Report Server by URL. If you decide to take this approach, you
can pass the web app identity to the Report Server and grant a minimum set
of permissions in RS to this account.
2. Replace the RS Windows security with Forms Authentication by writing a
custom security extension. This will allow you to incorporate interactive
features in your reports. In this scenario, the reports will be requested on
the client side of the application (e.g. by using the Report Viewer sample
control). If you decide to take this approach check out the sample security
extension from MS at
(http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/?url=/library/en-us/dnsql2k/html/ufairs.a
sp?frame=true#ufairs_topic3).
So, you have to carefully weight out your requirements for security,
reporting features and your application architecture to determine the best
integration scenario.
--
Hope this helps.
Rags Iyer
"DJM" wrote:
> I'm trying to incorporate the /ReportServer virtual into our application web
> site so we can point the Report Viewer control to /ReportServer rather than
> <default web site's IP>/ReportServer. I'm trying to remove authentication
> from <app>/ReportServer, but I've been unable to keep it from popping up
> that blasted login dialog box. I've briefly tried using the FormsAuth
> sample and even rewrote it to always return True from all the authentication
> functions, but neither solved my problem.
> The application is under Forms Auth. I just want the ReportServer virtual
> to run in that context. At this point, I don't even care if it's really
> keeping authentication or just letting anyone who happens to type in
> http://<our_app>/ReportServer go uncontested. It's extremely frustrating,
> and it doesn't work for any users as it is now.
> This is SQL Server Standard, so I don't know if custom security extensions
> (assuming I really had any clue as to how they worked or how to set them up)
> would even work (I came across a page that says only Enterprise supports
> them).
>
>|||The second option would be ideal, but if you'll notice, I tried that and was
unable to get it to make a shred of difference. Maybe I'm just not smart
enough to figure it out, but it's not working for me.
"Rags Iyer" <RagsIyer@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A2AD6EB1-4CE8-4305-8063-8EE6AC9E1828@.microsoft.com...
> You have two options:
> 1. Generating the report on the server side of the application by using
> the
> Render SOAP API. The advantage of this approach is that it is more secure
> since the user doesn't see the report URL (everything takes place on the
> server). The tradeoff is that the interactive features (drilldown,
> drillthrough, etc.) will not work with SOAP since their require direct
> access to the Report Server by URL. If you decide to take this approach,
> you
> can pass the web app identity to the Report Server and grant a minimum set
> of permissions in RS to this account.
> 2. Replace the RS Windows security with Forms Authentication by writing a
> custom security extension. This will allow you to incorporate interactive
> features in your reports. In this scenario, the reports will be requested
> on
> the client side of the application (e.g. by using the Report Viewer sample
> control). If you decide to take this approach check out the sample
> security
> extension from MS at
> (http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/?url=/library/en-us/dnsql2k/html/ufairs.a
> sp?frame=true#ufairs_topic3).
> So, you have to carefully weight out your requirements for security,
> reporting features and your application architecture to determine the best
> integration scenario.
> --
> Hope this helps.
> Rags Iyer
> "DJM" wrote:
>> I'm trying to incorporate the /ReportServer virtual into our application
>> web
>> site so we can point the Report Viewer control to /ReportServer rather
>> than
>> <default web site's IP>/ReportServer. I'm trying to remove
>> authentication
>> from <app>/ReportServer, but I've been unable to keep it from popping up
>> that blasted login dialog box. I've briefly tried using the FormsAuth
>> sample and even rewrote it to always return True from all the
>> authentication
>> functions, but neither solved my problem.
>> The application is under Forms Auth. I just want the ReportServer
>> virtual
>> to run in that context. At this point, I don't even care if it's really
>> keeping authentication or just letting anyone who happens to type in
>> http://<our_app>/ReportServer go uncontested. It's extremely
>> frustrating,
>> and it doesn't work for any users as it is now.
>> This is SQL Server Standard, so I don't know if custom security
>> extensions
>> (assuming I really had any clue as to how they worked or how to set them
>> up)
>> would even work (I came across a page that says only Enterprise supports
>> them).
>>
>>|||Is the Login Box still popping up when Forms Authetication is Implemented.?
"DJM" wrote:
> The second option would be ideal, but if you'll notice, I tried that and was
> unable to get it to make a shred of difference. Maybe I'm just not smart
> enough to figure it out, but it's not working for me.
> "Rags Iyer" <RagsIyer@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:A2AD6EB1-4CE8-4305-8063-8EE6AC9E1828@.microsoft.com...
> > You have two options:
> >
> > 1. Generating the report on the server side of the application by using
> > the
> > Render SOAP API. The advantage of this approach is that it is more secure
> > since the user doesn't see the report URL (everything takes place on the
> > server). The tradeoff is that the interactive features (drilldown,
> > drillthrough, etc.) will not work with SOAP since their require direct
> > access to the Report Server by URL. If you decide to take this approach,
> > you
> > can pass the web app identity to the Report Server and grant a minimum set
> > of permissions in RS to this account.
> >
> > 2. Replace the RS Windows security with Forms Authentication by writing a
> > custom security extension. This will allow you to incorporate interactive
> > features in your reports. In this scenario, the reports will be requested
> > on
> > the client side of the application (e.g. by using the Report Viewer sample
> > control). If you decide to take this approach check out the sample
> > security
> > extension from MS at
> > (http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/?url=/library/en-us/dnsql2k/html/ufairs.a
> > sp?frame=true#ufairs_topic3).
> >
> > So, you have to carefully weight out your requirements for security,
> > reporting features and your application architecture to determine the best
> > integration scenario.
> > --
> > Hope this helps.
> >
> > Rags Iyer
> >
> > "DJM" wrote:
> >
> >> I'm trying to incorporate the /ReportServer virtual into our application
> >> web
> >> site so we can point the Report Viewer control to /ReportServer rather
> >> than
> >> <default web site's IP>/ReportServer. I'm trying to remove
> >> authentication
> >> from <app>/ReportServer, but I've been unable to keep it from popping up
> >> that blasted login dialog box. I've briefly tried using the FormsAuth
> >> sample and even rewrote it to always return True from all the
> >> authentication
> >> functions, but neither solved my problem.
> >>
> >> The application is under Forms Auth. I just want the ReportServer
> >> virtual
> >> to run in that context. At this point, I don't even care if it's really
> >> keeping authentication or just letting anyone who happens to type in
> >> http://<our_app>/ReportServer go uncontested. It's extremely
> >> frustrating,
> >> and it doesn't work for any users as it is now.
> >>
> >> This is SQL Server Standard, so I don't know if custom security
> >> extensions
> >> (assuming I really had any clue as to how they worked or how to set them
> >> up)
> >> would even work (I came across a page that says only Enterprise supports
> >> them).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>|||Yes.
"Rags Iyer" <RagsIyer@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C574F74E-C580-47A4-86AD-BCD62253C700@.microsoft.com...
> Is the Login Box still popping up when Forms Authetication is
> Implemented.?|||Please check wherther the Security implemenation for Forms Authetication was
properly implemented.The authetication in the Rs Config File needs to be
changed to Forms Authentication and all the required policy is set.
Regards,
Rags Iyer
"DJM" wrote:
> Yes.
> "Rags Iyer" <RagsIyer@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:C574F74E-C580-47A4-86AD-BCD62253C700@.microsoft.com...
> >
> > Is the Login Box still popping up when Forms Authetication is
> > Implemented.?
>
>|||Please check wherther the Security implemenation for Forms Authetication was
properly implemented.The authetication in the Rs Config File needs to be
changed to Forms Authentication and all the required policy is set.
Regards,
Rags Iyer
"DJM" wrote:
> Yes.
> "Rags Iyer" <RagsIyer@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:C574F74E-C580-47A4-86AD-BCD62253C700@.microsoft.com...
> >
> > Is the Login Box still popping up when Forms Authetication is
> > Implemented.?
>
>|||I did that according to the documentation (adding Forms to the
authentication types or wherever that is, and changing authentication mode
to Forms in the web.config), and I was still getting the login box.
What gets me is that box is still appearing even when I set the
authentication mode to None.
"Rags Iyer" <RagsIyer@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E5169863-A011-43A4-BAB3-A0627C0A0272@.microsoft.com...
> Please check wherther the Security implemenation for Forms Authetication
> was
> properly implemented.The authetication in the Rs Config File needs to be
> changed to Forms Authentication and all the required policy is set.
> Regards,
> Rags Iyer
> "DJM" wrote:
>> Yes.
>> "Rags Iyer" <RagsIyer@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:C574F74E-C580-47A4-86AD-BCD62253C700@.microsoft.com...
>> >
>> > Is the Login Box still popping up when Forms Authetication is
>> > Implemented.?
>>

make stored procedure inactive?

HI I have a large .net web application with many stored procedures. I am
thinking that I might have a few extra ones that are no longer used by the
application and was wondering if there is an easy way to make a stored
procedure not accessable by the web application as a way to test if it is
being used without deleting it?
Thanks
Paul G
Software engineer.
"Paul" <Paul@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:847134DF-FF89-48DF-8C6C-50A5720E9040@.microsoft.com...
> HI I have a large .net web application with many stored procedures. I am
> thinking that I might have a few extra ones that are no longer used by the
> application and was wondering if there is an easy way to make a stored
> procedure not accessable by the web application as a way to test if it is
> being used without deleting it?
> Thanks
> --
> Paul G
> Software engineer.
I would simply rename the object to something else.
Take a look at sp_rename in the BOL.
Rick Sawtell
MCT, MCSD, MCDBA
|||ok thanks will give it a try.
Paul G
Software engineer.
"Paul" wrote:

> HI I have a large .net web application with many stored procedures. I am
> thinking that I might have a few extra ones that are no longer used by the
> application and was wondering if there is an easy way to make a stored
> procedure not accessable by the web application as a way to test if it is
> being used without deleting it?
> Thanks
> --
> Paul G
> Software engineer.
|||Paul,
Revoke / Deny the execute permission from application database user.
Take a look into Revoke / Deny in books online.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Paul" <Paul@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:05F662B0-1AB8-4629-8BD8-1F3AA1968CCE@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> ok thanks will give it a try.
> --
> Paul G
> Software engineer.
>
> "Paul" wrote:
|||Ok thanks, I think this will work as I have set up a user and password that
the applications uses so should be able to deny execution using enterprise
manager.
Paul G
Software engineer.
"Hari Prasad" wrote:

> Paul,
> Revoke / Deny the execute permission from application database user.
> Take a look into Revoke / Deny in books online.
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
> "Paul" <Paul@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:05F662B0-1AB8-4629-8BD8-1F3AA1968CCE@.microsoft.com...
>
>

make stored procedure inactive?

HI I have a large .net web application with many stored procedures. I am
thinking that I might have a few extra ones that are no longer used by the
application and was wondering if there is an easy way to make a stored
procedure not accessable by the web application as a way to test if it is
being used without deleting it?
Thanks
--
Paul G
Software engineer."Paul" <Paul@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:847134DF-FF89-48DF-8C6C-50A5720E9040@.microsoft.com...
> HI I have a large .net web application with many stored procedures. I am
> thinking that I might have a few extra ones that are no longer used by the
> application and was wondering if there is an easy way to make a stored
> procedure not accessable by the web application as a way to test if it is
> being used without deleting it?
> Thanks
> --
> Paul G
> Software engineer.
I would simply rename the object to something else.
Take a look at sp_rename in the BOL.
Rick Sawtell
MCT, MCSD, MCDBA|||ok thanks will give it a try.
--
Paul G
Software engineer.
"Paul" wrote:

> HI I have a large .net web application with many stored procedures. I am
> thinking that I might have a few extra ones that are no longer used by the
> application and was wondering if there is an easy way to make a stored
> procedure not accessable by the web application as a way to test if it is
> being used without deleting it?
> Thanks
> --
> Paul G
> Software engineer.|||Paul,
Revoke / Deny the execute permission from application database user.
Take a look into Revoke / Deny in books online.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Paul" <Paul@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:05F662B0-1AB8-4629-8BD8-1F3AA1968CCE@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> ok thanks will give it a try.
> --
> Paul G
> Software engineer.
>
> "Paul" wrote:
>|||Ok thanks, I think this will work as I have set up a user and password that
the applications uses so should be able to deny execution using enterprise
manager.
--
Paul G
Software engineer.
"Hari Prasad" wrote:

> Paul,
> Revoke / Deny the execute permission from application database user.
> Take a look into Revoke / Deny in books online.
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
> "Paul" <Paul@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:05F662B0-1AB8-4629-8BD8-1F3AA1968CCE@.microsoft.com...
>
>

make stored procedure inactive?

HI I have a large .net web application with many stored procedures. I am
thinking that I might have a few extra ones that are no longer used by the
application and was wondering if there is an easy way to make a stored
procedure not accessable by the web application as a way to test if it is
being used without deleting it?
Thanks
--
Paul G
Software engineer."Paul" <Paul@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:847134DF-FF89-48DF-8C6C-50A5720E9040@.microsoft.com...
> HI I have a large .net web application with many stored procedures. I am
> thinking that I might have a few extra ones that are no longer used by the
> application and was wondering if there is an easy way to make a stored
> procedure not accessable by the web application as a way to test if it is
> being used without deleting it?
> Thanks
> --
> Paul G
> Software engineer.
I would simply rename the object to something else.
Take a look at sp_rename in the BOL.
Rick Sawtell
MCT, MCSD, MCDBA|||ok thanks will give it a try.
--
Paul G
Software engineer.
"Paul" wrote:
> HI I have a large .net web application with many stored procedures. I am
> thinking that I might have a few extra ones that are no longer used by the
> application and was wondering if there is an easy way to make a stored
> procedure not accessable by the web application as a way to test if it is
> being used without deleting it?
> Thanks
> --
> Paul G
> Software engineer.|||Paul,
Revoke / Deny the execute permission from application database user.
Take a look into Revoke / Deny in books online.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Paul" <Paul@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:05F662B0-1AB8-4629-8BD8-1F3AA1968CCE@.microsoft.com...
> ok thanks will give it a try.
> --
> Paul G
> Software engineer.
>
> "Paul" wrote:
>> HI I have a large .net web application with many stored procedures. I am
>> thinking that I might have a few extra ones that are no longer used by
>> the
>> application and was wondering if there is an easy way to make a stored
>> procedure not accessable by the web application as a way to test if it is
>> being used without deleting it?
>> Thanks
>> --
>> Paul G
>> Software engineer.|||Ok thanks, I think this will work as I have set up a user and password that
the applications uses so should be able to deny execution using enterprise
manager.
--
Paul G
Software engineer.
"Hari Prasad" wrote:
> Paul,
> Revoke / Deny the execute permission from application database user.
> Take a look into Revoke / Deny in books online.
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
> "Paul" <Paul@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:05F662B0-1AB8-4629-8BD8-1F3AA1968CCE@.microsoft.com...
> > ok thanks will give it a try.
> > --
> > Paul G
> > Software engineer.
> >
> >
> > "Paul" wrote:
> >
> >> HI I have a large .net web application with many stored procedures. I am
> >> thinking that I might have a few extra ones that are no longer used by
> >> the
> >> application and was wondering if there is an easy way to make a stored
> >> procedure not accessable by the web application as a way to test if it is
> >> being used without deleting it?
> >> Thanks
> >> --
> >> Paul G
> >> Software engineer.
>
>

Major Problem!...Multiple user connection problem in reporting service 2000 with SOAP

Hi Everyone,

I am having a big problem here.

I am using Reporting Service 2000 and Visual Studio 2005. I have developed a custom web control which communicates with reporting web service and displays report. I pass username, password and domain information as network credential for communicating with report server (report server is remote). This is a web application in which users can see reports on the web page which uses my custom web control.

Everything works fine when there is single user. But when another user logs onto website and tries to access same or different report it seems like connection of the first user gets lost. And everything crashes for first user and for second user it works fine.

In fact if second user is accessing the same report then first user can see second user's report information which is no at all acceptable. I am sure that there should be some way so that multiple users can communicate with reporting server programmatically at the same time. Microsoft wouldn't make reporting web service so that only one user can access report at a time, would they?

Can anyone help me with this problem? Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Sounds like your users are being identified as the same person which would suggest annonymous access is being used or your web control is passing the same credentials for both users. I'm not sure how you've coded it or whether you are doing any caching or storing session state somewhere.

You have to narrow down what is at fault here. I would suggest the following:

Set your report server and report manager virtual directories to integrated or basic authentication and have 2 separate users access report manager at the same time|||

Thanks Adam for quick reply.

I don't have anonymous access enabled. I am using integrated windows authentication. Earlier i was trying to authenticate all users with one administartor credentials to communicate with Reporting web service. But then i changed my code so that it takes individual user's credentials. But this didn't make any difference.

I read in one reporting service book that Report server overwrites SessionID member after each call to the Render method. Therefore, two subsequent report requests will share same sessions only if they ask for the same report (assuming that the parameter set is same)

For example, let's say you run report A, then report B, and then report A again. When report B is rendered, its session identifier will overwrite the previous session identifier, which means that you will lose report A's session identifier. When report A is run again, even if the parameter set is the same, its execution will create a new report session and IsNewExecution will return true.

So i think this overwriting of SessionID by report server is causing the problem. But i don't know yet how to program so that it maintains proper SessionID for each user and hence doesn't crash for any user.

If anyone has any idea for solving this problem then please let me know. Thanks in advance.

|||Figured out. It was bug in my code. Accidentlly i had declared Parameter property as static in my code and because of that one user's report was using other user's property and which was making program crash. Thanks for reply though.

Major Multiple connection problem RS2000 with SOAP

Hi Everyone,

I am having a big problem here.

I am using Reporting Service 2000 and Visual Studio 2005. I have developed a custom web control which communicates with reporting web service and displays report. I pass username, password and domain information as network credential for communicating with report server (report server is remote). This is a web application in which users can see reports on the web page which uses my custom web control.

Everything works fine when there is single user. But when another user logs onto website and tries to access same or different report it seems like connection of the first user gets lost. And everything crashes for first user and for second user it works fine.

In fact if second user is accessing the same report then first user can see second user's report information which is no at all acceptable. I am sure that should be some way so that multiple users can communicate with reporting server programmatically at the same time. Microsoft wouldn't make reporting web service so that only one user can access report at a time, would they?

Can anyone help me with this problem? ANyhelp will be greatly appreciated.

I don't have anonymous access enabled. I am using integrated windows authentication. Earlier i was trying to authenticate all users with one administartor credentials to communicate with Reporting web service. But then i changed my code so that it takes individual user's credentials. But this didn't make any difference.

I read in one reporting service book that Report server overwrites SessionID member after each call to the Render method. Therefore, two subsequent report requests will share same sessions only if they ask for the same report (assuming that the parameter set is same)

For example, let's say you run report A, then report B, and then report A again. When report B is rendered, its session identifier will overwrite the previous session identifier, which means that you will lose report A's session identifier. When report A is run again, even if the parameter set is the same, its execution will create a new report session and IsNewExecution will return true.

So i think this overwriting of SessionID by report server is causing the problem. But i don't know yet how to program so that it maintains proper SessionID for each user and hence doesn't crash for any user.

If anyone has any idea for solving this problem then please let me know. Thanks in advance.