Partitioned View Broken After Moving Table To New Filegroup

Jul 20, 2005

I am using SQL Server 2000, SP3.

I created an updatable partitioned view awhile ago and it has been
running smoothly for some time. The partition is on a DATETIME column
and it is partitioned by month. Each month a stored procedure is
scheduled that creates the new month's table, and alters the view to
include it. Again... working like a charm for quite some time.

This past weekend I moved some of the first tables onto a new file
group. I did this through Enterprise Manager, by going into design
mode for the table, then going into the properties for the table and
changing the file group there as well as in all of the indexes. Now
the partitioned view is no longer updatable. It gives the error
message: "UNION ALL view '<view name>' is not updatable because a
partitioning column was not found."

I have extracted the DDL for all of the partition tables and compared
them and they all look the same. I checked and then double-checked the
CHECK constraints to make sure that they were all valid and they are.
If I remove the tables that I moved to the new file group from the
view, then it is once again updatable, but when I put them back in it
fails again.

Any ideas? If you would like samples of the code then I can send it
along, but it's rather large, so I have not included it here.

Thanks!
Thomas R. Hummel

View 3 Replies


ADVERTISEMENT

Moving ONE Table To A Different Filegroup Using T-SQL

Aug 29, 2002

I need to know if it is possible to move ONE table from an existing filegroup to another existing filegroup.
The answer I received to use ALTER database only modifies the file/filegroup name or changes the default filegroup.
Any assistance will be greatly appreciated.

View 1 Replies View Related

Moving Table(s) To A Different Filegroup In SQL 2005

Oct 2, 2007

Is there anyway to move tables without any indexes to a filegroup?

View 1 Replies View Related

Moving Record From View To A Table

Mar 28, 2006

Hi All,
I have a view that contains 30 million records.I want to move the view to a table in my database using DTS,but it is taking a lot of time,and making my tempdb to grow fast in giga bytes.Please is there anyway i can copy this view into the table easily in minutes.The view structure and the table structure are the same.Also, how can I index a view and can I add unique key to a view.

Thanks All in advance.
Mokah

View 6 Replies View Related

Moving Objects From One Filegroup To Another

Apr 25, 2000

I have my user defined objects created on the PRIMARY filegroup.
I have a secondary filegroup existing for the database.
How can I move all my user objects to the secondary filegroup from the
primary filegroup.
Info on this is appreciated.

regards
Sush.

View 1 Replies View Related

Moving Indices To New Filegroup

Mar 26, 2002

I have created a new filegroup and would like to move my indices there. Do I need to create a file for each index or can I just specify the filegroup in Enterprise Manager?

Thanks!

Ellen

View 1 Replies View Related

Moving Datafile To Different Filegroup

Nov 10, 2005

Hi,
In SQL Server 2000 how to move a secondary data file to different filegroup without removing and re-creating the secondary data file.

Thanks in advance.
-S

View 1 Replies View Related

Moving A Heap To Another Filegroup

Jul 20, 2005

I have a big table (heap)... well, not so big, I have a small serverand I want to spread access to it across several new disks dedicatedonly to that table.I known its possible to do that creating a clustered index with "ONfilegroup" option but I want to maintain it as a heap, is there anyway to do this without dropping indexes/references - bulk unload -create table - bulk load - create indexes?.

View 4 Replies View Related

Moving Data From One Filegroup To Another.....but Wait, There Is More!!

May 13, 2008

OK, I know this is out there all over and yes I did a search for this topic; however, I am confused about tables with an image data type and with moving text file group to another filegroup.

Here is what I have:

I have a table storing imaged documents and has become very large. I want to move the table to another filegroup. The table is created like this:

USE [PD51_Data]
GO
/****** Object: Table [dbo].[SCANNEDDOCUMENTS] Script Date: 05/13/2008 14:52:40 ******/
SET ANSI_NULLS ON
GO
SET QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON
GO
SET ANSI_PADDING ON
GO
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[SCANNEDDOCUMENTS](
[DocID] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL,
[CaseID] [int] NOT NULL,
[DocName] [varchar](50) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NOT NULL,
[Doc] [image] NOT NULL,
[DocLocation] [varchar](255) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NOT NULL,
[DocNotes] [text] COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NULL,
[TopicID] [int] NULL,
[ScannedDocumentsCheckSum] [varchar](128) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NOT NULL,PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED
(
[DocID] ASC
)WITH (PAD_INDEX = OFF, STATISTICS_NORECOMPUTE = OFF, IGNORE_DUP_KEY = OFF, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON) ON [PRIMARY]
) ON [PRIMARY] TEXTIMAGE_ON [PRIMARY]

GO
SET ANSI_PADDING OFF
GO
ALTER TABLE [dbo].[SCANNEDDOCUMENTS] WITH NOCHECK ADD CONSTRAINT [ISCANNEDDOCUMENTS2] FOREIGN KEY([TopicID])
REFERENCES [dbo].[TOPICS] ([TopicID])
GO
ALTER TABLE [dbo].[SCANNEDDOCUMENTS] CHECK CONSTRAINT [ISCANNEDDOCUMENTS2]

On a test DB, I moved the clustered and nonclustered indexes to a secondary filegroup no problem, but it still shows to be stored in the primary filegroup. I read an article about having to create a new table in the secondary in order to move the images and text file group. Has anyone come across this?

Do I need to drop the clustered index and FK to move to a secondary filegroup?

Or

Do I create a new table into the secondary filegroup and then add the Clustered index and constraints?

View 4 Replies View Related

Partitioned View

Mar 6, 2006

Hi! This is my first post and I really need help with Partitioned View. I'm using Sql Server 2000 and I created a partitioned view using 6 tables and now a need to create the table '7' and alter the view. But when i'm trying to insert new data i'm receiving the message: :eek:
"Server: Msg 4416, Level 16, State 5, Line 1
UNION ALL view 'tb_sld_cob_pap' is not updatable because the definition
contains a disallowed construct."

My code is:

drop VIEW tb_sld_cob_pap
GO
CREATE TABLE dbo.tb_sld_cob_pap_7 (
cod_operacao int NOT NULL ,
cod_contrato int NOT NULL ,
sequencial_duplicata int NOT NULL ,
data_sld_pap smalldatetime NOT NULL CHECK ([data_sld_pap] >= '20060201'),
liqex_dia_nom_outros float NULL ,
liqex_dia_moe_outros float NULL,
constraint pk_pap7 primary key (cod_operacao,cod_contrato,sequencial_duplicata,da ta_sld_pap)
)
GO
CREATE INDEX IdxSldCobPap7_1 ON dbo.tb_sld_cob_pap_7(cod_titulo, seq_titulo, data_sld_pap)
GO

CREATE INDEX IdxSldCobPap7_2 ON dbo.tb_sld_cob_pap_7(cod_operacao, seq_ctr_sacado, sequencial_duplicata, data_sld_pap)
GO

ALTER TABLE dbo.tb_sld_cob_pap_6
DROP CONSTRAINT CK__tb_sld_co__data___6C190EBB
GO

ALTER TABLE dbo.tb_sld_cob_pap_6 ADD CONSTRAINT
CK__tb_sld_co__data___6C190EBB CHECK (((([data_sld_pap] >= '20051201') and ([data_sld_pap] < '20060201'))))
GO

create VIEW tb_sld_cob_pap
as
select * from tb_sld_cob_pap_1
union all
select * from tb_sld_cob_pap_2
union all
select * from tb_sld_cob_pap_3
union all
select * from tb_sld_cob_pap_4
union all
select * from tb_sld_cob_pap_5
union all
select * from tb_sld_cob_pap_6
union all
select * from tb_sld_cob_pap_7

My table tb_sld_cob_pap_6 does NOT have data with ([data_sld_pap] >= '20060201').
I'm using this script in other database and I don't have this problem.



Thank you...

View 6 Replies View Related

Partitioned View

Jun 18, 2007

USE Northwind
GO

CREATE TABLE myTable99_1 (
Accountchar(3)
, Ledgerchar(4)
, PostDatedatetime
, PRIMARY KEY (Account, Ledger)
, CHECK(PostDate> '1/1/1999' and PostDate < '12/31/1999 23:59:59'))
CREATE TABLE myTable99_2 (
Accountchar(3)
, Ledgerchar(4)
, PostDatedatetime
, PRIMARY KEY (Account, Ledger)
, CHECK(PostDate> '1/1/2000' and PostDate < '12/31/2000 23:59:59'))
CREATE TABLE myTable99_3 (
Accountchar(3)
, Ledgerchar(4)
, PostDatedatetime
, PRIMARY KEY (Account, Ledger)
, CHECK(PostDate> '1/1/2001' and PostDate < '12/31/2001 23:59:59'))

CREATE INDEX myTable99_1_IX ON MyTable99_1
(Account, Ledger)
CREATE INDEX myTable99_2_IX ON MyTable99_2
(Account, Ledger)
CREATE INDEX myTable99_3_IX ON MyTable99_3
(Account, Ledger)
GO

CREATE VIEW myView99
AS
SELECT Account
, Ledger
, PostDate
FROM myTable99_1
UNION ALL
SELECT Account
, Ledger
, PostDate
FROM myTable99_2
UNION ALL
SELECT Account
, Ledger
, PostDate
FROM myTable99_3
GO

SELECT * FROM myView99 WHERE Account = 1 AND Ledger = 1
GO

DROP VIEW myView99
DROP TABLE myTable99_1, myTable99_2, myTable99_3
GO



OK, so I thought I knew this, but I'm looking for parallelism...not only am I no getting it, I'm getting an Index scan....is it becuse I didn't put any data in the table? I thought it would stil show my index seek with parallelism

What up, homey?

View 5 Replies View Related

Best Method To Identify Broken View Is Schemabind?

Sep 11, 2007

I am looking for the best way to know if table changes are going to break a view. Is the best way to do this by using the schemabinding option when creating the view? What are the disadvantages of using schemabinding for a view?

Are there other methods to evaluate views as broken? Can you run a sp_ proc or a custom SQL procedure to validate all views?

Thanks.

View 1 Replies View Related

SQL Server 2008 :: Moving Into A Specific Filegroup

Jun 3, 2015

SQL 2008 R2

I have a partitioned table in which one of the partitions is on the Primary filegroup. I want to move the data off of that Primary filegroup, and and on to a new filegroup named RTFG6.

Scheme and function currently defined as:

CREATE PARTITION SCHEME [PS1_Left_id] AS PARTITION [PF1_Left_id] TO ([RTFG1], [RTFG2], [RTFG3], [RTFG4], [RTFG5], [PRIMARY])

CREATE PARTITION FUNCTION [PF1_Left_id](int) AS RANGE LEFT FOR VALUES (10, 15, 35, 48, 53)

I've tried split and merge, and for whatever reason, always end up with the Primary filegroup holding data.

How do i get it off of Primary completely, and onto RTFG1 to RTFG6?

I don't want to export to a holding table and re-create the table if i can avoid it, due to identity columns and relationships with multiple tables.

View 0 Replies View Related

Updating Across A Partitioned View

Mar 7, 2012

This post concerns updating across a partitioned view, and not unlike others about this subject I am getting this error:

Msg 4436, Level 16, State 12, Line 1
UNION ALL view 'dbII.dbo.MyTable' is not updatable because a partitioning column was not found.

I am aware of the rules for defining a partitioning column, but interpreting them may have beaten me. So perhaps I haven't abided by all the rules. How to spot which one(s) from the view and table definitions? I suspect the CHECK constraint does not allow the ASCII function, but I can't see how to avoid using it given SYSCODE entries in one table are like "[A-Z]%" and in the other are like "[0-9]%".

Otherwise, I suspect it is because one of the tables has, by legacy, a text column and the view is casting it to varchar(MAX). I also suspect it is because there's a second column with a unique index. These aren't mentioned in the rules (are they?).

Here's the view definition:

SELECT SYSCODE, COL2, CAST(COMMENTS AS varchar(MAX)) AS COMMENTS
FROM dbo.MYTABLE
UNION ALL
SELECT SYSCODE, COL2, COMMENTS
FROM OTHERDATABASE.dbo.MYTABLE AS MYTABLE_1

And here are the table definitions:

-- Table in the database where view is defined
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[MYTABLE](
[SYSCODE] [char](12) NOT NULL,

[Code]....

View 1 Replies View Related

Partitioned View Problem

Oct 18, 2007

Hi all,

I am designing 3 p:artitioned views for 3 tables. Those tables grow up in 1.5 millions of rows per month (each one), so I decided to partition those tables monthly. The issue is that if I want to create the views with more than 256 months (256 tables) SQL Server says: 'Server: Msg 106, Level 15, State 1, Procedure Jugadas, Line 258Too many table names in the query. The maximum allowable is 256.'

Is there any workaround for this?

Another solution maybe?

PD1: I've tested with less than 256 tables and it works fine, I can update and query the tables (except for a couple of querys where I've got to join 2 or more of the involucred views in which case I got a similar error saying about a 260 table limit).

View 2 Replies View Related

Partitioned View Question

Nov 13, 2007



I have a table that I'm trying to scale out into a partitioned view. It's about 30 million rows. It's a workflow table and I have a taskID in the table. Originally the table was partitioned on this column but performance still wasn't what I wanted it to be, so we figured out how we could partition on a bit flag of IsOpen.

Question #1) Anyone know a best practice for creating apartitioned views on multi-columns?

What I'd like to try to do to lower the complexity of the original partitioned view is to create a view of partitioned views. Is this even possible (This is Q#2, BTW).

View 1 Replies View Related

Updating A Partitioned View In A Cursor

Jan 13, 2004

I have a partitioned view defined by a UNTION ALL of member tables. I can update the member tables through the view without any problem. However, when I declare a cursor on this partitioned view and try to update the view using WHERE CURRENT OF, I get an error saying 'The target object type is not updatable through a cursor'. Does anyone know if it's the case that updating a partitioned view through cursor is not supported in SQL Server 2000?

Thanks

View 2 Replies View Related

SQL 2012 :: Partitioned View Over Two Databases

Sep 8, 2014

I have database with a large table (30 Billion rows) because it is so big I separated the data in quarterly tables and created a partitioned view (with hints for the date column) about 1 billions a quarter. (all in separated filegroups). The tables themselfes are partitioned by date again, so you slice out one day

However the full-backup of grows and grows and the mainpart of it is "old" but needed data.

So I was thinking to put the older data in a separate database (with separated backup) and then point to the table in my view.

While this is technical possible (leaving out the WITH SCHEMABINDING) I wonder what negative consequences it will have.

I already had to lose "with schemabing".

I have to use separate partioning functions - for each database its own - (partition schemas where already separated due to separated filegroups)

What about query optimization, does the optimizer care that there are two databases?

View 6 Replies View Related

Will This Query Be Optimized For A Partitioned View?

Jul 20, 2005

Hello :-)My question is: If I query a partitioned view, but don't know the valuesin the "where x in(<expression>)" clause, i.e.: select * from viewAwhere intVal in(select intVal from tbl1) . Compared to: select * fromviewA where intVal in(5,6).Of course "intVal" is partitioning column.Will this result in an optimized query that searches only the relevanttables?*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!

View 1 Replies View Related

Partitioned View With Computed Column

Jan 23, 2008

Using SQL Server 2005. Defined partitioned view with computed column. Computed column was a constant varchar. Ran a SELECT. According to Query Execution Plan, SQL did recognize the computed column as the partitioning column and used it to optimize the query.

However MSDN says a computed column cannot be used as the partitioning column.

Could someone from MS clarify?

View 2 Replies View Related

Optimization Of Query On Partitioned View

May 27, 2008

Schema below.

The execution plan shows that this query is correctly optimized to check only the underlying Employee_2008 table.

select * from Employee where ReportingYear = '2008'

This query is not optimized and checks both Employee_2008 and Employee_2007:

declare @ry varchar(4)
set @ry = '2008'
select * from Employee where ReportingYear = @ry

How can I get second query to be optimized correctly?

Schema:

CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Employee_2007](
[EmployeeID] [int] NOT NULL,
[Name] [varchar](50) NOT NULL
) ON [PRIMARY]

CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Employee_2008](
[EmployeeID] [int] NOT NULL,
[Name] [varchar](50) NOT NULL
) ON [PRIMARY]

CREATE VIEW [dbo].[Employee]
AS
SELECT
'2007' ReportingYear,
EmployeeID,
Name
FROM Employee_2007

UNION ALL

SELECT
'2008' ReportingYear,
EmployeeID,
Name
FROM Employee_2008

View 3 Replies View Related

Partitioned View &&amp; Computed Column..

May 14, 2006

Hello,

please enlighten me regarding an issue with partitioned view... There are 3 tables in my DB of a similar structure:

CREATE TABLE Table1 (value1 varchar(1))
CREATE TABLE Table2 (value1 varchar(1))
CREATE TABLE Table3 (value1 varchar(1))

INSERT INTO Table1 (value1)
SELECT 'a' UNION SELECT 'b' UNION SELECT 'c'

INSERT INTO Table2 (value1)
SELECT 'a' UNION SELECT 'b' UNION SELECT 'c'

INSERT INTO Table3 (value1)
SELECT 'a' UNION SELECT 'b' UNION SELECT 'c'

As sometimes we need to access all data from these tables, a view has been created:

CREATE VIEW AllData AS
SELECT value1, '1' as table_id from Table1
UNION ALL
SELECT value1, '2' as table_id from Table2
UNION ALL
SELECT value1, '3' as table_id from Table3

The problem is that while running a query like

SELECT * from AllData WHERE value1 = 'a' and table_id = '3'

I see a table scan being performed on all 3 tables, not just table3 - i.e optimisation engine doesn't care for my table_id computed column and for that fact that required data is located ONLY in Table3.

Is there any way to force optimiser to consider this column andrrebuild a plan? If not - how can I rebuild a view (I can't modify tables) to achieve that? Maybe create an index for a view?

Thanks in advance. RTFM and search don't seem to clarify this for me...

View 8 Replies View Related

Distributed Partitioned View With RPC (or DTC) Problem

Oct 5, 2007

I am setting up 3 Linked Servers (SERVER_A, SERVER_B and SERVER_C) in an isolated local network. They are all running SQL Server 2005 Developer Edition, all on XP SP2. On each server, I have a distributed partitioned view named WAREHOUSE_ALL that basically is the UNION of all WAREHOUSE tables.

I am having trouble in running write (INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE) queries on the distributed partitioned view. The error returned was (run from SERVER_B)

OLE DB provider "SQLNCLI" for linked server "SERVER_A" returned message "No transaction is active.". Msg 7391, Level 16, State 2, Line 7The operation could not be performed because OLE DB provider "SQLNCLI" for linked server "SERVER_A" was unable to begin a distributed transaction.

However, executing a read (SELECT) query ran smoothly without error.

I have done all the steps required as described in the article at http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=873160 . Note that the only difference between the situation and our situation is the provider (SQLOLEDB and SQLNCLI), which I guess does not important. Unfortunately, the error still comes out.

After reading heaps of other article, I suspected that there is something wrong with MSDTC. As far as I know, all the settings for MSDTC were set accordingly. Then, I ran DTCPing - http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=5e325025-4dcd-4658-a549-1d549ac17644&DisplayLang=en and the error returned was
DTCping log file: C:Documents and SettingsAdministratorDesktoplSERVER_B2496RPC server is ready
Please Start Partner DTCping before pinging
++++++++++++Validating Remote Computer Name++++++++++++
Please refer to following log file for details:
C:Documents and SettingsAdministratorDesktoplSERVER_B2496.log
Invoking RPC method on SERVER_C
Problem:fail to invoke remote RPC method
Error(0x5) at dtcping.cpp @303
-->RPC pinging exception
-->5(Access is denied.)
RPC test failed

And here is the log file:


Platform:Windows XP
IP Configure Information
Host Name . . . . . . . . . : SERVER_B
DNS Servers . . . . . . . . : 129.78.99.2
Node Type . . . . . . . . . :
NetBIOS Scope ID. . . . . . :
IP Routing Enabled. . . . . : no
WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . : no
NetBIOS Resolution Uses DNS : no

Ethernet adapter {4404F3CB-F4B7-4990-912C-E69721C885B1}:

Description . . . . . . . . : 3Com EtherLink XL 10/100 PCI TX NIC (3C905B-TX) #2 - Packet Scheduler Miniport
Physical Address. . . . . . : 00-01-02-85-B8-A9
DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . : no
IP Address. . . . . . . . . : 172.19.102.35
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . : 172.19.102.250
DHCP Server . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.255
Primary WINS Server . . . . : 0.0.0.0
Secondary WINS Server . . . : 0.0.0.0
Lease Obtained. . . . . . . : Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970
Lease Expires . . . . . . . : Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970

++++++++++++lmhosts.sam++++++++++++

++++++++++++hosts ++++++++++++
127.0.0.1 localhost

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DTCping 1.9 Report for SERVER_B
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
RPC server is ready
++++++++++++Validating Remote Computer Name++++++++++++
10-05, 17:10:54.769-->Start DTC connection test
Name Resolution:
SERVER_C-->172.19.102.36-->SERVER_C
10-05, 17:11:09.781-->Start RPC test (SERVER_B-->SERVER_C)
Problem:fail to invoke remote RPC method
Error(0x5) at dtcping.cpp @303
-->RPC pinging exception
-->5(Access is denied.)
RPC test failed


I guess it could be due to port problem, which I have already opened in the Windows Firewall. There is one article which is confusing me -> Update to automatically open port 135 in Windows Firewall when a TCP or a UDP RPC server registers with the endpoint mapper at http://support.microsoft.com/kb/838191 (This article shows automatic opening of port 135!)

Please help me. Thanks.

View 8 Replies View Related

Bulk Insert In To A Partitioned View?

May 24, 2006

Greetings once again my SQL friends,

I am getting the following error when I attempt to complete my data flow task. The destination is a partitioned view but I get the following error message when I run the package :

Partitioned view 'PRICE_DIM' is not updatable as the target of a bulk operation



How to solve this problem?

View 1 Replies View Related

Insertion Faild In Partitioned View In Sql Server 7.0

Dec 7, 2000

I have a problem while I try to insert data into a partioned view I am
getting the following error.

Server: Msg 4436, Level 16, State 12, Line 9
UNION ALL view 'sales_all' is not updatable because a partitioning column
was not found.

Any thoughts

USE pubs

CREATE TABLE sales_monthly
( sales_month int NOT NULL ,
sales_qty int NOT NULL
)
GO
CREATE TABLE sales_jan
( sales_month int NOT NULL,
sales_qty int NOT NULL
)
GO
CREATE TABLE sales_feb
( sales_month int NOT NULL,
sales_qty int NOT NULL
)
GO

ALTER TABLE sales_feb WITH NOCHECK ADD
CONSTRAINT PK_sales_feb PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED
( sales_month
) ,
CONSTRAINT CK_sales_feb CHECK (sales_month = 2)
GO

ALTER TABLE sales_jan WITH NOCHECK ADD
CONSTRAINT PK_sales_jan PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED
( sales_month
) ,
CONSTRAINT CK_sales_jan CHECK (sales_month = 1)
GO

View 2 Replies View Related

Unable To Create A Partitioned Indexed View

Jul 25, 2005

Hi,

While creating an indexed view with the command :

create unique clustered index idx_atrid on account_transactions (policy)

there is a check constraint on the policy column of the tables used in this view.

The following error is encountered

Cannot index the view 'test.dbo.account_transactions'. It contains one or more disallowed constructs.

Can anyone help?

View 1 Replies View Related

Triggers On Tables Underlying A Partitioned View

Jul 23, 2005

We have a partitioned view with 4 underlying tables. The view and eachof the underlying tables are in seperate databases on the same server.Inserts and deletes on the view work fine. We then add insert anddelete triggers to each of the underlying tables. The triggers modifya different set of tables in the same database as the view (differentthan the underlying table). The problem is those triggers aren't firedwhen inserting or deleteing via the view. Inserting or deleteing theunderlying table directly causes the the triggers to fire, but not whenthe tables are accessed as a result of using the view.Am I missing something? The triggers are 'for insert' and 'fordelete'. No 'instead of' or 'after' triggers.

View 4 Replies View Related

Query Against Partitioned View Is Not Optimized Due To CONVERT_IMPLICIT

Nov 2, 2007

We have a situation where queries against a partitioned view ignore a suitable index and perform a table scan (against 200+MB of data), where the same query on the underlying table(s) results in a 4 page index seek. I can€™t find any mention of the situation, so I€™m trying a post here.


We€™re running SQL Server 2005 Enterprise edition sp2 on Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition sp1 on a two node cluster, and it also occurs on a stand-alone development box with Developer edition. We have four tables, named Options#0, Options#1, Options#2, and Options#3. All are almost identical (script generated by SSMS and edited down a bit):


SET ANSI_NULLS OFF
SET QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON

CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Options#0](
[ControlID] [tinyint] NOT NULL CONSTRAINT [DF_Options#0__ControlID] DEFAULT ((0)),
[ModelCode] [char](8) NOT NULL,
[EquipmentID] [int] NOT NULL,
[AdjustmentContextID] [int] NOT NULL,
[EquipmentCode] [char](2) NOT NULL,
[EquipmentTypeCode] [char](1) NOT NULL,
[Description] [varchar](50) NOT NULL,
[DisplayOrder] [smallint] NOT NULL,
[IsStandard] [bit] NOT NULL,
[Priority] [tinyint] NOT NULL,
[Status] [bit] NOT NULL,
[Adjustment] [int] NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT [PK_Options#0] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED
(
[ModelCode] ASC,
[EquipmentID] ASC,
[AdjustmentContextID] ASC,
[ControlID] ASC
)WITH (PAD_INDEX = OFF, STATISTICS_NORECOMPUTE = OFF, IGNORE_DUP_KEY = OFF, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON) ON [PRIMARY]
) ON [PRIMARY]


ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Options#0] WITH CHECK ADD CONSTRAINT [CK_Options#0__ControlID] CHECK (([ControlID]=(0)))


ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Options#0] CHECK CONSTRAINT [CK_Options#0__ControlID]


The only differences between the tables are in the names and in the value defaulted to and CHECKed, which matches the table name (to support the partitioned view, of course).


We receive and load data ever week and every two month, and use an unlikely algorithm to load and manage its availability by running an ATLER on the view (to maintain the access rights defined for the hosting environment). Scripted out via SSMS, the view looks like:


SET ANSI_NULLS ON
SET QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON
CREATE VIEW [dbo].[Options] AS select * from Options#1 union all select * from Options#3


The problem is that when we issue a query like


SELECT count(*)
from Options
where ControlID = 1
and ModelCode = '2004NIC9'


The resulting query (as checked via the query plan and SET STATISTICS IO on) will get €œpartitioned€?, running against the proper table, but it will ignore the query, perform a table scan, and churn through 200+MB of data. A Similar query run against the underlying table


SELECT count(*)
from Options#1
where ControlID = 1
and ModelCode = '2004NIC9'


(with or without the ControlID = 1 clause) will perform a Clustered Index Seek and read maybe 4 pages.


Analyzing the execution plan shows that the table query work like you€™d think, but for the query against the view we get a Clustered Index Scan, with predicate:


[DBName].[dbo].[Options#1].[ControlID]=(1) AND CONVERT_IMPLICIT(char(8),[ DBName].[dbo].[Options#1].[ModelCode],0)=€™2004NIC9€™


I get the same results when explicitly listing all columns in the view. The code page on the view and tables is the same (as determined by checking properties via SSMS).


Why is the table data column being implicitly converted to the data type that it already is? Why does this occur when working with the partitioned view but not with the actual table? Can this behavior be controlled or modified without losing the (incredibly useful) data loading management benefits of the partitioned view? I€™m guessing (and hoping) it€™s some subtle quirk or mis-setting, please set me on the right path!


Philip Kelley

View 7 Replies View Related

Incorrect Query Plan With Partitioned View On SQL 2000

Jun 19, 2001

I have a partitioned view containing 4 tables (example follows at end)

The query plan generated on a select correctly accesses just one of the tables

The query plan generated on an update always accesses all four of the tables. I thought that it should only access the partition required to satisfy the update. Can anyone please advise whether:
a) Is this is expected behaviour?
b) Is the partitioned view incorrectly configured in some way?
c) Is there is a known bug in this area

Note that the behaviour is the same with SP1 on SQL2000

I would be very grateful for any advice

Thanks

Stefan Bennett

Example follows

--Create the tables and insert the values
CREATE TABLE Sales_West (
Ordernum INT,
total money,
region char(5) check (region = 'West'),
primary key (Ordernum, region)
)
CREATE TABLE Sales_North (
Ordernum INT,
total money,
region char(5) check (region = 'North'),
primary key (Ordernum,region)
)
CREATE TABLE Sales_East (
Ordernum INT,
total money,
region char(5) check (region = 'East'),
primary key (Ordernum,region)
)
CREATE TABLE Sales_South (
Ordernum INT,
total money,
region char(5) check (region = 'South'),
primary key (Ordernum,region)
)
GO

INSERT Sales_West VALUES (16544, 2465, 'West')
INSERT Sales_West VALUES (32123, 4309, 'West')
INSERT Sales_North VALUES (16544, 3229, 'North')
INSERT Sales_North VALUES (26544, 4000, 'North')
INSERT Sales_East VALUES ( 22222, 43332, 'East')
INSERT Sales_East VALUES ( 77777, 10301, 'East')
INSERT Sales_South VALUES (23456, 4320, 'South')
INSERT Sales_South VALUES (16544, 9999, 'South')
GO

--create the view that combines all sales tables
CREATE VIEW Sales_National
AS
SELECT *
FROM Sales_West
UNION ALL
SELECT *
FROM Sales_North
UNION ALL
SELECT *
FROM Sales_East
UNION ALL
SELECT *
FROM Sales_South
GO

--Look at execution plan for this query
-- This correctly only accesses the South partition
SELECT *
FROM sales_national
WHERE region = 'south'

-- Look at execution plan for update
-- This accesses all partitions - Why?
update sales_national
set total = 100
where ordernum = 23456;

View 1 Replies View Related

SQL Server 2014 :: Indexed View Not Being Used For Partitioned Clustered Column-store Index?

Oct 9, 2015

I am trying to use an indexed view to allow for aggregations to be generated more quickly in my test data warehouse. The Fact Table I am creating the indexed view on is a partitioned clustered columnstore index.

I have created a view with the following code:

ALTER view dbo.FactView
with schemabinding
as
select local_date_key, meter_key, unit_key, read_type_key, sum(isnull(read_value,0)) as [s_read_value], sum(isnull(cost,0)) as [s_cost]
, sum(isnull(easy_target_value,0)) as [s_easy_target_value], sum(isnull(hard_target_value,0)) as [s_hard_target_value]
, sum(isnull(read_value,0)) as [a_read_value], sum(isnull(temperature,0)) as [a_temp], sum(isnull(co2,0)) as [s_co2]
, sum(isnull(easy_target_co2,0)) as [s_easy_target_co2]
, sum(isnull(hard_target_co2,0)) as [s_hard_target_co2], sum(isnull(temp1,0)) as [a_temp1], sum(isnull(temp2,0)) as [a_temp2]
, sum(isnull(volume,0)) as [s_volume], count_big(*) as [freq]
from dbo.FactConsumptionPart
group by local_date_key, read_type_key, meter_key, unit_key

I then created an index on the view as follows:

create unique clustered index IDX_FV on factview (local_date_key, read_type_key, meter_key, unit_key)

I then followed this up by running some large calculations that required use of the aggregation functionality on the main fact table, grouping by the clustered index columns and only returning averages and sums that are available in the view, but it still uses the underlying table to perform the aggregations, rather than the view I have created. Running an equivalent query on the view, then it takes 75% less time to query the indexed view directly, to using the fact table. I think the expected behaviour was that in SQL Server Enterprise or Developer edition (I am using developer edition), then the fact table should have used the indexed view. what I might be missing, for the query not to be using the indexed view?

View 1 Replies View Related

SQL 2000 Partitioned View Works Fine, But CURSOR With FOR UPDATE Fails To Declare

Oct 17, 2006

This one has me stumped.

I created an updateable partioned view of a very large table. Now I get an error when I attempt to declare a CURSOR that SELECTs from the view, and a FOR UPDATE argument is in the declaration.

There error generated is:

Server: Msg 16957, Level 16, State 4, Line 3

FOR UPDATE cannot be specified on a READ ONLY cursor



Here is the cursor declaration:



declare some_cursor CURSOR

for

select *

from part_view

FOR UPDATE



Any ideas, guys? Thanks in advance for knocking your head against this one.

PS: Since I tested the updateability of the view there are no issues with primary keys, uniqueness, or indexes missing. Also, unfortunately, the dreaded cursor is requried, so set based alternatives are not an option - it's from within Peoplesoft.

View 2 Replies View Related

Query Server To Find All Partitioned Tables, Partition Name, Column Used, Partitioned By

Dec 17, 2007

I want to find a way to get partition info for all the tables in all the databases for a server. Showing database name, table name, schema name, partition by (maybe; year, month, day, number, alpha), column used in partition, current active partition, last partition (for date partitions I want to know if the partition goes untill 2007, so I can add 2008)

all I've come up with so far is:






Code Block

SELECT distinct o.name From sys.partitions p
inner join sys.objects o on (o.object_id = p.object_id)
where o.type_desc = 'USER_TABLE'
and p.partition_number > 1

View 3 Replies View Related

Broken Subscriptions Due To Empty Table

Jul 31, 2007

Hi,

I was wondering what the best way was to deal with subscriptions breaking due to an empty table. I have subscriptions that people have scheduled to go out daily, but on certain days the table may be empty, in this case the subscription doesn't read the parameters for the report and then the subscription breaks.

My original solution involved creating a #temp table with the same columns as the original table and inserting one row into it which I'd union with the original table, this row in the temp table had all its values set to 0. The solution worked when I ran it in SQL Server Management Studio but it seems SRS doesn't like the INSERT INTO statement, which is the error I get, but I've read on these forums that it doesn't like #temp tables either. I proceeded to use a stored procedure with all the code in it, but I might have trouble filtering on multi value parameters, because at times these parameter lists get real big, plus I have to do this for multiple reports and don't want to get into creating stored procedures for each report.

Following is what the code I used look something like that executes and does the job in Management Studio but not SRS. I'm mainly just looking for the easiest and cleanest way to do this, since it'll have to be done across multiple reports, so disregard the code if there's an easier way to do it. Thanks in advance.

create table #dummytable
(
name varchar(35),
country varchar(35),
idnumber (int)
)
GO

insert into #dummytable (name),values('0');

select name, country, idnumber
from originaltable
where name in (@name)

union
select name = 0, country = 0, idnumber = 0
from #dummytable

drop #dummytable


View 4 Replies View Related







Copyrights 2005-15 www.BigResource.com, All rights reserved