Database

Oracle still has this limit (in older versions it was 256 elements) The purpose with the limit is that parsing the query is quite resource demanding and if you're having more than 1000 elements in an in statement they're claiming that you're doing something wrong anyway. Use an array instead. Politicians are always realistically manoeuvering for the next election. They are obsolete as fundamental problem-solvers. Buckminster Fuller

Thanks man

Thanks!

This is not a backup/restore issue. You need to do some research into replication and distributed database strategies. This is not a trivial subject. Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH

TOP 50 may be any 50.

Caveat I'm a SQL Server user but would assume the syntax is similar. Put the where clause into the join left outer join Stores on (Stores.SID = Purchases.Stores and Stores.City = 'Porto') Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH

I wonder just what your expectations are from this post? You have not asked a question but simply stated a rather vague requirement to reproduce a reasonably complex application in ASP.net. What do you expect us to do to help? Have you looked at existing offerings[^] and do you think you have something better to offer, or a cheaper alternative! Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH

How about using Exists? SELECT Id, Name FROM Words As W WHERE Exists ( SELECT 1 FROM Letters As L WHERE L.Id = W.Id And L.Letter = 'A' ) And Exists ( SELECT 1 FROM Letters As L WHERE L.Id = W.Id And L.Letter = 'C' ) The query optimizer will probably give you the same plan for this as the INNER JOIN option, but this makes your intention slightly clearer IMO. "These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer

Commandtype.text is default and does not need to be specified. Oh, and Txtspeak is considered immature and shouldn't be used in professional context. Politicians are always realistically manoeuvering for the next election. They are obsolete as fundamental problem-solvers. Buckminster Fuller

Jassim Rahma wrote: So what's your advise? Webservices, and hosting the server yourself. Easy argumentation; you'll only be the database-admin if the server is yours. Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]

You are doing a number of things wrong. You should use a datepicker instead of a textbox, this will help you control the format of your data, ALWAYS use the DATETIME data type, NEVER use varchar/string for datetime data. Learn to use parameterised queries[^] they will make you life a lot simpler and eliminate the data type issue (oh and make your code more secure). Instead of editing into a datagrid I recommend you use a detail control or a dialog to do your data entry, this give you much greater control easier to manage. Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH

http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/site/search?f%5B0%5D.Type=VisualStudioVersion&f%5B0%5D.Value=10.0&f%5B0%5D.Text=Visual%20Studio%202010&f%5B1%5D.Type=ProgrammingLanguage&f%5B1%5D.Value=VB&f%5B1%5D.Text=VB.NET&f%5B2%5D.Type=Platform&f%5B2%5D.Value=Data&f%5B2%5D.Text=Data[^]

Cool :thumbsup: “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” ― Christopher Hitchens

ok i got it. thanks for the help.. But now the problem is , i can have multiple records with same tag_id, when i update all the records with same tag_id is updating. i need to update only the latest record. how can i solve this.......

This is not a set of questions you should rely on a forum to answer. You are going to need a professional in the area of setting up a distributed database environment with replication back to HO and probably setting up an OLAP reporting structure. It can be VERY expensive to get this wrong. SSRS is excellent for canned reports but not the right tool for dynamic queries, for that you need to look at Business Intelligence (BI) solutions and visualisation tools. Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH

vkEE wrote: our seniors want this matter researched since it is a new bug in their test environment. They don't want this bug to migrate to production environment. Unless you are in full control of your environment and able to debug every device-driver, some bugs will remain unsolved. vkEE wrote: It has crashed 3 times the past few months Do you know at what time? Anything in the event-log at that specific time? Does it run under .NET 4? If yes, you could consider making a minidump. vkEE wrote: and it is defined with single hash, #. I was hinting at researching the three. Whether it's the correct one will depend on the context of it's use in the stored procedure. You will have to verify the things mentioned, and again, you'd get a more usefull answer if you provide the code for the stored procedure. MSDN[^] states: There are two types of temporary tables: local and global. They differ from each other in their names, their visibility, and their availability. Local temporary tables have a single number sign (#) as the first character of their names; they are visible only to the current connection for the user, and they are deleted when the user disconnects from the instance of SQL Server. Global temporary tables have two number signs (##) as the first characters of their names; they are visible to any user after they are created, and they are deleted when all users referencing the table disconnect from the instance of SQL Server. ..and it becomes more confusing[^] if you are EXECUTEing dynamic SQL. Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]