[MS Design Tools] - Class not registered."

On a Windows 2000 pro workstation I am using SQL 2000 enterprise
manager I am trying to return all rows, I get the error message "An
unexpected error happened during this operation. [MS Design Tools] -
Class not registered."
I have reinstalled the client tools, reinstalled service pack 3a, but I
am not having any luck. Any ideas how I can resolve this issue?
Thanks
| From: "Ryan" <rstodola@.gmail.com>
| Newsgroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.clients
| Subject: [MS Design Tools] - Class not registered."
| Date: 22 Feb 2005 11:38:57 -0800
| Organization: http://groups.google.com
| Lines: 12
| Message-ID: <1109101137.832608.183900@.f14g2000cwb.googlegroups .com>
| NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.176.151.126
| Mime-Version: 1.0
| Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
| X-Trace: posting.google.com 1109101141 26265 127.0.0.1 (22 Feb 2005
19:39:01 GMT)
| X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@.google.com
| NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 19:39:01 +0000 (UTC)
| User-Agent: G2/0.2
| Complaints-To: groups-abuse@.google.com
| Injection-Info: f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com;
posting-host=129.176.151.126;
| posting-account=OtO42g0AAAAxhVXq79oLm_y3qUbyubb3
| Path:
TK2MSFTNGXA02.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl!TK2MSF TNGP08.phx.gbl!newsfeed00.
sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news.glorb.com!postnews.google.com!f14g2 000cwb.g
ooglegroups.com!not-for-mail
| Xref: TK2MSFTNGXA02.phx.gbl microsoft.public.sqlserver.clients:29558
| X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.sqlserver.clients
|
| On a Windows 2000 pro workstation I am using SQL 2000 enterprise
| manager I am trying to return all rows, I get the error message "An
| unexpected error happened during this operation. [MS Design Tools] -
| Class not registered."
|
|
| I have reinstalled the client tools, reinstalled service pack 3a, but I
| am not having any luck. Any ideas how I can resolve this issue?
|
|
| Thanks
|
|
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> <><><><><><><>
Hi Ryan,
Try re-installing the current version of MDAC on your system. You can use
the Component Checker
to determine installed version information of MDAC -
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...df6-4a21-4b43-
bf53-14332ef092c9&displaylang=en
HTH,
Yasemin Gunduz
SQL Support Engineer
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

[MS Design Tools] - Class Not Registered

On a Windows 2000 pro workstation I am using SQL 2000 enterprise
manager I am trying to return all rows, I get the error message "An
unexpected error happened during this operation. [MS Design Tools] -
Class not registered."
I have reinstalled the client tools, reinstalled service pack 3a, but I
am not having any luck. Any ideas how I can resolve this issue?
Thanks
From the command line, or "Run ...", run regsvr32 on the DLLs in %Program
Files%\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\MSDeisgner98 and MSDesigner7 directory.
Seth Sanusi
Test Lead - SQL Server Tools
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Ryan" <rstodola@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1109100062.665588.142490@.l41g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> On a Windows 2000 pro workstation I am using SQL 2000 enterprise
> manager I am trying to return all rows, I get the error message "An
> unexpected error happened during this operation. [MS Design Tools] -
> Class not registered."
> I have reinstalled the client tools, reinstalled service pack 3a, but I
> am not having any luck. Any ideas how I can resolve this issue?
> Thanks
>

[Bug?] Where clause in SQLSERVER7 doesn't return results where it really should

Hi group,
I found the following behaviour really surprising:
[SQLServer 7]
consider following query:
SELECT L.logid, L.logdate, L.vragensetid, L.dooruserid, L.incidentid,
L.action, U.realname
FROM tbllog AS L LEFT OUTER JOIN tbluser AS U ON (L.dooruserid=U.userid)
WHERE((logdate >= '2006-02-08') AND (logdate <= '2006-02-08'))
ORDER BY logdate;
This query returns 0 results.
If I remove one part of the where-clause, it works just fine:
Like this
SELECT L.logid, L.logdate, L.vragensetid, L.dooruserid, L.incidentid,
L.action, U.realname
FROM tbllog AS L LEFT OUTER JOIN tbluser AS U ON (L.dooruserid=U.userid)
WHERE((logdate <= '2006-02-08'))
ORDER BY logdate;
or
SELECT L.logid, L.logdate, L.vragensetid, L.dooruserid, L.incidentid,
L.action, U.realname
FROM tbllog AS L LEFT OUTER JOIN tbluser AS U ON (L.dooruserid=U.userid)
WHERE((logdate >= '2006-02-08'))
ORDER BY logdate;
(These queries only differ in the >= or <= in the whereclause.)
Both queries return some rows!
(As expected by me because I know the table does have rows with logdate
'2006-02-08')
It seems that SQLServer is unable to find ANY records if I use both
whereclauses at the same time.
The reason this weird situation is needed is because I need to assemble the
query dynamically based on some form-info posted by a user.
Can anybody explain this?
Is this a known bug?
Or is maybe something going on that has to do with my (limmited)
understanding of SQLServer/SQL ?
I can of course code around this issue by checking in my script if the dates
are the same and in that case make only whereclause (logdate='2006-02-08'),
but I am curious what is going on.
Thanks for your time!
Regards,
Erwin Moller
Erwin Moller wrote:
Hi, I made the situation even simpler, and found the reason for my problem.
I removed the join, and left only 1 where-clause.
So the following query:
SELECT logid, logdate, vragensetid, dooruserid, incidentid, action
FROM tbllog
WHERE(logdate <= '2006-02-08') ORDER BY logdate;
Resulted in NO results.
Where the database contains records on this date.
Reason is: I am a simpleminded idiot.
I do not tell the database how many hours/minutes/seconds....
So while there are records on 2006-02-08, they are ALL after midnight.
:-)
Sorry for the noise!
Regards,
Erwin Moller

[Bug?] Where clause in SQLSERVER7 doesn't return results where it really should

Hi group,
I found the following behaviour really surprising:
[SQLServer 7]
consider following query:
SELECT L.logid, L.logdate, L.vragensetid, L.dooruserid, L.incidentid,
L.action, U.realname
FROM tbllog AS L LEFT OUTER JOIN tbluser AS U ON (L.dooruserid=U.userid)
WHERE((logdate >= '2006-02-08') AND (logdate <= '2006-02-08'))
ORDER BY logdate;
--
This query returns 0 results.
If I remove one part of the where-clause, it works just fine:
Like this
--
SELECT L.logid, L.logdate, L.vragensetid, L.dooruserid, L.incidentid,
L.action, U.realname
FROM tbllog AS L LEFT OUTER JOIN tbluser AS U ON (L.dooruserid=U.userid)
WHERE((logdate <= '2006-02-08'))
ORDER BY logdate;
--
or
SELECT L.logid, L.logdate, L.vragensetid, L.dooruserid, L.incidentid,
L.action, U.realname
FROM tbllog AS L LEFT OUTER JOIN tbluser AS U ON (L.dooruserid=U.userid)
WHERE((logdate >= '2006-02-08'))
ORDER BY logdate;
--
(These queries only differ in the >= or <= in the whereclause.)
Both queries return some rows!
(As expected by me because I know the table does have rows with logdate
'2006-02-08')
It seems that SQLServer is unable to find ANY records if I use both
whereclauses at the same time.
The reason this weird situation is needed is because I need to assemble the
query dynamically based on some form-info posted by a user.
Can anybody explain this?
Is this a known bug?
Or is maybe something going on that has to do with my (limmited)
understanding of SQLServer/SQL '
I can of course code around this issue by checking in my script if the dates
are the same and in that case make only whereclause (logdate='2006-02-08'),
but I am curious what is going on.
Thanks for your time!
Regards,
Erwin MollerErwin Moller wrote:
Hi, I made the situation even simpler, and found the reason for my problem.
I removed the join, and left only 1 where-clause.
So the following query:
SELECT logid, logdate, vragensetid, dooruserid, incidentid, action
FROM tbllog
WHERE(logdate <= '2006-02-08') ORDER BY logdate;
--
Resulted in NO results.
Where the database contains records on this date.
Reason is: I am a simpleminded idiot.
I do not tell the database how many hours/minutes/seconds....
So while there are records on 2006-02-08, they are ALL after midnight.
:-)
Sorry for the noise!
Regards,
Erwin Moller

[ask] sqlserver getdate() function doesnt return seconds value

i have a quite strange condition...

when i add some value in database with getdate() function it only returns date and minute not the seconds...

does somebody have an experience about this

What is the data type of the variable or column that you are using? If it is smaldatetime, the accuracy is only of minutes. If you want seconds, you'll need to use datetime.

If you're doing something else, post your code to see if we can help you figure it out.

Don

|||

getdate() actually returns current date & time. Just try to select getdate() and you will see. You must have assign the value of getdate() to smalldatetime.|||

I've changed to datetime and it works :)

weew... i never thought about it... just a little mistake there :)

thx anyway

@return_status from SQLCLR stored procedure

I'm trying to write a VB CLR stored procedure that will set the return statu
s
to 0 or 1 depending on whether the CLR was successful or not. How do I do
that? Basically I want to use the following T-SQL code to call my CLR and
set the @.return_status
declare @.return_status int
EXEC @.return_status=My_CLR_SP
select @.return_statusI would like to know how to do this as well. Can anyone help us?
Greg Larsen wrote:
> I'm trying to write a VB CLR stored procedure that will set the return sta
tus
> to 0 or 1 depending on whether the CLR was successful or not. How do I do
> that? Basically I want to use the following T-SQL code to call my CLR and
> set the @.return_status
> declare @.return_status int
> EXEC @.return_status=My_CLR_SP
> select @.return_status|||Greg,
I found this at http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms131094.aspx.
I tried it out and it works great.
Here is a really simple example:
<Microsoft.SqlServer.Server.SqlProcedure()> _
Public Shared Function TestProc() As Int32
TestProc = 1
End Function
And the test script:
DECLARE @.result AS int
EXEC @.result = TestProc
PRINT @.result
Tom
Greg Larsen wrote:
> I'm trying to write a VB CLR stored procedure that will set the return sta
tus
> to 0 or 1 depending on whether the CLR was successful or not. How do I do
> that? Basically I want to use the following T-SQL code to call my CLR and
> set the @.return_status
> declare @.return_status int
> EXEC @.return_status=My_CLR_SP
> select @.return_status|||Thank you for the VB example.
I got mine to working by writing it in C # and doing the following:
[Microsoft.SqlServer.Server.SqlProcedure]
public static int TestProc()
{ return=1;}|||You're welcome. Thanks for posting the C# example.
Tom
Greg Larsen wrote:
> Thank you for the VB example.
> I got mine to working by writing it in C # and doing the following:
> [Microsoft.SqlServer.Server.SqlProcedure]
> public static int TestProc()
> { return=1;}

@NumericVal IS NOT NULL seems not to return a boolean.

I'm trying to ensure that only of the parameters is passed to my stored procedure.

BOL says that the IS [NOT] NULL operator (language construct?) will return a boolean. An IF statement takes an expression which results in a boolean so I was surprised to find that the below code doesn't parse.

CREATE PROC sp_OneParm(
@.NumericVal float = null,
@.StringVal nvarchar(200) = null,
@.DateVal datetime = null,
@.BitVal bit = null)
AS
DECLARE @.ValCount tinyint
SET @.ValCount = 0

-- Ensure we've only got one update value specified
IF @.NumericVal IS NOT NULL @.ValCount = @.ValCount + 1
IF @.StringVal IS NOT NULL @.ValCount = @.ValCount + 1
IF @.DateVal IS NOT NULL @.ValCount = @.ValCount + 1
IF @.BitVal IS NOT NULL @.ValCount = @.ValCount + 1
IF @.ValCount > 1 RAISERROR ('Only one @.*Val paramater may be specified when calling sp_OneParm()', 16, 1)

-- Other Stuff
GO

Am I missing something simple or do I need to restructure my code to achieve the logic I want?Sure :)

IF @.NumericVal IS NOT NULL SET @.ValCount = @.ValCount + 1|||Bugger. :o
Thank-you roac.

@@ROWCOUNT = 0 in a trigger

I'm going over some triggers in an old database we have and have come
accross the following...
...
IF (@.ROWCOUNT = 0)
RETURN
...
Can a trigger ever fire if zero rows were affected? Should I remove this
from the trigger?
Thanks.>> Can a trigger ever fire if zero rows were affected?
Yes, the trigger will fire once the corresponding DML is invoked. The number
of rows has no impact on its execution.
As a recommended practice, you should not.
Anith|||> Can a trigger ever fire if zero rows were affected? Should I remove this
> from the trigger?
Yes it will be fired. Just be careful using "set nocount on" before
inquiring for @.@.rowcount.
Example:
create table t1 (
c1 int not null default(0)
)
go
create trigger tr_t1_ins on t1
for insert
as
set nocount on
print '(' + ltrim(@.@.rowcount) + ' row(s) inserted' + ')'
go
create trigger tr_t1_ins_1 on t1
for insert
as
print '(' + ltrim(@.@.rowcount) + ' row(s) inserted' + ')'
go
create trigger tr_t1_upd on t1
for update
as
print '(' + ltrim(@.@.rowcount) + ' row(s) updated' + ')'
go
create trigger tr_t1_del on t1
for delete
as
print '(' + ltrim(@.@.rowcount) + ' row(s) deleted' + ')'
go
insert into t1 default values
go
update t1
set c1 = 1
where c1 = 2
go
delete t1
where c1 = 2
go
drop table t1
go
AMB
"C-W" wrote:

> I'm going over some triggers in an old database we have and have come
> accross the following...
> ...
> IF (@.ROWCOUNT = 0)
> RETURN
> ...
> Can a trigger ever fire if zero rows were affected? Should I remove this
> from the trigger?
> Thanks.
>
>|||Thanks for the information,
Chris
"C-W" <nomailplease@.microsoft.nospam> wrote in message
news:u25d8jPnFHA.3480@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I'm going over some triggers in an old database we have and have come
> accross the following...
> ...
> IF (@.ROWCOUNT = 0)
> RETURN
> ...
> Can a trigger ever fire if zero rows were affected? Should I remove this
> from the trigger?
> Thanks.
>|||As others mentioned, the trigger will fire once per the corresponding
statement. This includes 0, 1, >1 affected rows.
In some cases you may want to apply different logic depending on the number
of affected rows. @.@.rowcount is your best tool to achieve this:
IF @.@.rowcount - 0 RETURN;
IF @.@.rowcount = 1
BEGIN -- 1 affected row logic
..
END
ELSE
BEGIN -- >1 affected rows logic
..
END
BG, SQL Server MVP
www.SolidQualityLearning.com
"C-W" <nomailplease@.microsoft.nospam> wrote in message
news:u25d8jPnFHA.3480@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I'm going over some triggers in an old database we have and have come
> accross the following...
> ...
> IF (@.ROWCOUNT = 0)
> RETURN
> ...
> Can a trigger ever fire if zero rows were affected? Should I remove this
> from the trigger?
> Thanks.
>

@@ROWCOUNT

How can I return the number of rows returned by a select statement such as
the following one that returns zero in @.Qty ?
Alter Procedure GetMonitors
(
@.Qty INT OUTPUT
)
As
SELECT a.Suburb, a.State FROM
(
SELECT Suburb, State FROM Monitors
UNION
SELECT Suburb, State FROM Properties
WHERE Delisted Is Null
) a
GROUP BY Suburb, State
SET @.Qty = @.@.ROWCOUNT
return
Thanks in advance...Below work just fine for me... Did you define the parameter as out when you
call the proc?
USE pubs
GO
ALTER PROC p
@.qty int OUT
AS
SELECT au_lname, au_fname FROM authors
SET @.qty = @.@.ROWCOUNT
GO
--Prove that it works:
DECLARE @.rows int
EXEC p @.qty = @.rows OUT
PRINT @.rows
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"McHenry" <mchenry@.mchenry.com> wrote in message
news:44350412$0$20647$5a62ac22@.per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> How can I return the number of rows returned by a select statement such as
the following one that
> returns zero in @.Qty ?
> Alter Procedure GetMonitors
> (
> @.Qty INT OUTPUT
> )
> As
> SELECT a.Suburb, a.State FROM
> (
> SELECT Suburb, State FROM Monitors
> UNION
> SELECT Suburb, State FROM Properties
> WHERE Delisted Is Null
> ) a
> GROUP BY Suburb, State
> SET @.Qty = @.@.ROWCOUNT
> return
>
> Thanks in advance...
>|||Thanks... my mistake !
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:OMCL8TXWGHA.1564@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Below work just fine for me... Did you define the parameter as out when
> you call the proc?
> USE pubs
> GO
> ALTER PROC p
> @.qty int OUT
> AS
> SELECT au_lname, au_fname FROM authors
> SET @.qty = @.@.ROWCOUNT
> GO
> --Prove that it works:
> DECLARE @.rows int
> EXEC p @.qty = @.rows OUT
> PRINT @.rows
>
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>
> "McHenry" <mchenry@.mchenry.com> wrote in message
> news:44350412$0$20647$5a62ac22@.per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>

@@ROWCOUNT

Hi all.
Why doesn't this query return number of affected rows?
UPDATE tblOrderPackages
SET packageIsSend = 1
WHERE id = 134
SELECT @.@.ROWCOUNT AS rowsAffected
Thanks,
Sharon.It should. Is this in a stored procedure or something? What do you get as a
result?
MC
"Sharon" <nothing@.null.void> wrote in message
news:u4Op3j9$FHA.1872@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi all.
> Why doesn't this query return number of affected rows?
> UPDATE tblOrderPackages
> SET packageIsSend = 1
> WHERE id = 134
> SELECT @.@.ROWCOUNT AS rowsAffected
> Thanks,
> Sharon.
>|||Hi,
Its a simple query, not in a stored procedure.
When trying to get "rowsAffected" from then result set, i get this:
Item cannot be found in the collection
Sharon.
"MC" <marko_culo#@.#yahoo#.#com#> wrote in message
news:uqTzat9$FHA.3568@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> It should. Is this in a stored procedure or something? What do you get as
> a result?
>
> MC
>
> "Sharon" <nothing@.null.void> wrote in message
> news:u4Op3j9$FHA.1872@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>|||When i run this in the query analyzer, it works.
"Sharon" <nothing@.null.void> wrote in message
news:%23nheAw9$FHA.984@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> Its a simple query, not in a stored procedure.
> When trying to get "rowsAffected" from then result set, i get this:
> Item cannot be found in the collection
> Sharon.
> "MC" <marko_culo#@.#yahoo#.#com#> wrote in message
> news:uqTzat9$FHA.3568@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>|||How are you reading this? Perhaps this is not an sql problem?
MC
"Sharon" <nothing@.null.void> wrote in message
news:%23nheAw9$FHA.984@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> Its a simple query, not in a stored procedure.
> When trying to get "rowsAffected" from then result set, i get this:
> Item cannot be found in the collection
> Sharon.
> "MC" <marko_culo#@.#yahoo#.#com#> wrote in message
> news:uqTzat9$FHA.3568@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>|||Hi
Depending on your settings, it might be in the 2nd recordset returned.
Regards
--
Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Zurich, Switzerland
IM: mike@.epprecht.net
MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
"MC" <marko_culo#@.#yahoo#.#com#> wrote in message
news:O9T4979$FHA.436@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> How are you reading this? Perhaps this is not an sql problem?
>
> MC
>
> "Sharon" <nothing@.null.void> wrote in message
> news:%23nheAw9$FHA.984@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>|||From asp page:
sql = "UPDATE tblOrderPackages SET packageIsSend = 1 WHERE id = 134 SELECT
@.@.ROWCOUNT AS rowsAffected"
rowsAffected = dbConn.Execute(sql)("rowsAffected")
"MC" <marko_culo#@.#yahoo#.#com#> wrote in message
news:O9T4979$FHA.436@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> How are you reading this? Perhaps this is not an sql problem?
>
> MC
>
> "Sharon" <nothing@.null.void> wrote in message
> news:%23nheAw9$FHA.984@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>|||Thanks Mike.
This works:
rowsAffected = db.execute(sql).NextRecordset()("rowsAffected")
"Mike Epprecht (SQL MVP)" <mike@.epprecht.net> wrote in message
news:uZn12$9$FHA.1408@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi
> Depending on your settings, it might be in the 2nd recordset returned.
> Regards
> --
> Mike Epprecht, Microsoft SQL Server MVP
> Zurich, Switzerland
> IM: mike@.epprecht.net
> MVP Program: http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
> Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/epprecht/
> "MC" <marko_culo#@.#yahoo#.#com#> wrote in message
> news:O9T4979$FHA.436@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>|||Sharon wrote on Tue, 13 Dec 2005 14:26:01 +0200:

> From asp page:
> sql = "UPDATE tblOrderPackages SET packageIsSend = 1 WHERE id = 134 SELECT
> @.@.ROWCOUNT AS rowsAffected"
> rowsAffected = dbConn.Execute(sql)("rowsAffected")
Try adding SET NOCOUNT ON at the start - the first recordset returned is
returning the number of rows updated by the UPDATE statement.
Dan

@@rowcount

I want to do something like this.
SELECT *
FROM dbo.Contact [C]
-- If any rows are returned then return to front end.
IF @.@.rowcount > 0
Begin
GOTO FinishSuccessModule
End
-- But i had doubt here
We will never be sure that @.@.RowCount is giving the row count of the query
mentioned above since in a heavy concurrent scenario (as we have in our db
and its growing since our user base is also growing) before your query and
the checking of @.@.RowCount there might be another select fired by another
process or transaction which updates @.@.Rowcount which in turn give you
incorrect values.
how can we implement the same functionality using some other way, i dont
want If exists as there are around 6-7 conditions which are totally
select..if any one of them return record then come out else continue with
other sql st.
does @.@.rowcount create issues as mentioned above and second can we avoid
that using some other functionality.
Sanjay
Sanjay
No, rowcount is safe.
Bojidar Alexandrov
"Sanjay" <Sanjay@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7276DE0A-F23B-403B-BEE5-C83E51FA71FC@.microsoft.com...
> I want to do something like this.
> SELECT *
> FROM dbo.Contact [C]
> -- If any rows are returned then return to front end.
> IF @.@.rowcount > 0
> Begin
> GOTO FinishSuccessModule
> End
> -- But i had doubt here
> We will never be sure that @.@.RowCount is giving the row count of the
query
> mentioned above since in a heavy concurrent scenario (as we have in our db
> and its growing since our user base is also growing) before your query and
> the checking of @.@.RowCount there might be another select fired by another
> process or transaction which updates @.@.Rowcount which in turn give you
> incorrect values.
> how can we implement the same functionality using some other way, i dont
> want If exists as there are around 6-7 conditions which are totally
> select..if any one of them return record then come out else continue with
> other sql st.
> does @.@.rowcount create issues as mentioned above and second can we avoid
> that using some other functionality.
> --
> Sanjay
> --
> Sanjay
|||If all you need to know is are "any" rows returned and don't care how many,
I would change the initial query to SELECT TOP 1 * FROM dbo.Contact (C). If
your contact table gets thousands of rows, why go thru and read them all
when you just need to know "do I get back at least 1 row"? And to be more
specific, you don't need a SELECT *. Pick one narrow column for your
select. Something like select top 1 ContactID from dbo.contact (c). This
is a lot more efficient.
"Bojidar Alexandrov" <bojo_do_not_spam@.kodar.net> wrote in message
news:eWegGSspEHA.3244@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...[vbcol=seagreen]
> No, rowcount is safe.
> Bojidar Alexandrov
> "Sanjay" <Sanjay@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:7276DE0A-F23B-403B-BEE5-C83E51FA71FC@.microsoft.com...
> query
db[vbcol=seagreen]
and[vbcol=seagreen]
another[vbcol=seagreen]
with
>

@@rowcount

I want to do something like this.
SELECT *
FROM dbo.Contact [C]
-- If any rows are returned then return to front end.
IF @.@.rowcount > 0
Begin
GOTO FinishSuccessModule
End
-- But i had doubt here
We will never be sure that @.@.RowCount is giving the row count of the query
mentioned above since in a heavy concurrent scenario (as we have in our db
and its growing since our user base is also growing) before your query and
the checking of @.@.RowCount there might be another select fired by another
process or transaction which updates @.@.Rowcount which in turn give you
incorrect values.
how can we implement the same functionality using some other way, i dont
want If exists as there are around 6-7 conditions which are totally
select..if any one of them return record then come out else continue with
other sql st.
does @.@.rowcount create issues as mentioned above and second can we avoid
that using some other functionality.
--
Sanjay
--
SanjayNo, rowcount is safe.
Bojidar Alexandrov
"Sanjay" <Sanjay@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7276DE0A-F23B-403B-BEE5-C83E51FA71FC@.microsoft.com...
> I want to do something like this.
> SELECT *
> FROM dbo.Contact [C]
> -- If any rows are returned then return to front end.
> IF @.@.rowcount > 0
> Begin
> GOTO FinishSuccessModule
> End
> -- But i had doubt here
> We will never be sure that @.@.RowCount is giving the row count of the
query
> mentioned above since in a heavy concurrent scenario (as we have in our db
> and its growing since our user base is also growing) before your query and
> the checking of @.@.RowCount there might be another select fired by another
> process or transaction which updates @.@.Rowcount which in turn give you
> incorrect values.
> how can we implement the same functionality using some other way, i dont
> want If exists as there are around 6-7 conditions which are totally
> select..if any one of them return record then come out else continue with
> other sql st.
> does @.@.rowcount create issues as mentioned above and second can we avoid
> that using some other functionality.
> --
> Sanjay
> --
> Sanjay|||If all you need to know is are "any" rows returned and don't care how many,
I would change the initial query to SELECT TOP 1 * FROM dbo.Contact (C). If
your contact table gets thousands of rows, why go thru and read them all
when you just need to know "do I get back at least 1 row"? And to be more
specific, you don't need a SELECT *. Pick one narrow column for your
select. Something like select top 1 ContactID from dbo.contact (c). This
is a lot more efficient.
"Bojidar Alexandrov" <bojo_do_not_spam@.kodar.net> wrote in message
news:eWegGSspEHA.3244@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> No, rowcount is safe.
> Bojidar Alexandrov
> "Sanjay" <Sanjay@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:7276DE0A-F23B-403B-BEE5-C83E51FA71FC@.microsoft.com...
> > I want to do something like this.
> > SELECT *
> > FROM dbo.Contact [C]
> > -- If any rows are returned then return to front end.
> > IF @.@.rowcount > 0
> > Begin
> > GOTO FinishSuccessModule
> > End
> > -- But i had doubt here
> > We will never be sure that @.@.RowCount is giving the row count of the
> query
> > mentioned above since in a heavy concurrent scenario (as we have in our
db
> > and its growing since our user base is also growing) before your query
and
> > the checking of @.@.RowCount there might be another select fired by
another
> > process or transaction which updates @.@.Rowcount which in turn give you
> > incorrect values.
> >
> > how can we implement the same functionality using some other way, i dont
> > want If exists as there are around 6-7 conditions which are totally
> > select..if any one of them return record then come out else continue
with
> > other sql st.
> >
> > does @.@.rowcount create issues as mentioned above and second can we avoid
> > that using some other functionality.
> > --
> > Sanjay
> > --
> > Sanjay
>