DataSource Controls :: Creating Cluster Index From View With Aggregate Function?
Mar 5, 2010
Here is my code in SQL
[Code]....
Error i am facing is :Msg 8668, Level 16, State 0, Line 2Cannot create the clustered index 'RateViewIndex' on view 'NoteToPass.dbo.RateView' because the select list of the view contains an expression on result of aggregate function or grouping column. Consider removing expression on result of aggregate function or grouping column from select list.
Cannot create the clustered index 'RateViewIndex' on view 'NoteToPass.dbo.RateView' because the select list of the view contains an expression on result of aggregate function or grouping column. Consider removing expression on result of aggregate function or grouping column from select list.
Is there a way to do this in either scalar function form or in an aggregate function form? The problem I'm dealing with is building a security system with multiple tiers of inheritable permissions. Like you'll inherit certain permissions form the department level and then certain permissions from the supervisor level. I'd like to find a way to produce these resultsFor user permissions I pull these binary values and get these results, (they are sorted by their tree node depth level in the hierarchy.
Is there a way to do this in either scalar function form or in an aggregate function form? The problem I'm dealing with is building a security system with multiple tiers of inheritable permissions. Like you'll inherit certain permissions form the department level and then certain permissions from the supervisor level. I'd like to find a way to produce these results
For user permissions I pull these binary values and get these results, (they are sorted by their tree node depth level in the hierarchy.)
[code]....
Does it look like I will be stuck with manually compiling the tables of departmentpermissions and supervisorpermissions base on every possible outcome of inherited permissions or is there a way to do this on the fly in an efficient manner?
In my query , I have an aggregate function and other columns and a Group By clause where there is a column which I need to show without placing it in Group By clause.
In my query , I have an aggregate function and other columns and a Group By clause where there is a column which I need to show without placing it in Group By clause.
I would like to know which one is better, table-valued function or View, in terms of perfomance.Earlier I have created view which is performing cross join (which takes time) and 2/3 Left outer join and it's taking time. To reduce execution time I have created table-valued function with parameter to reduce cross join execution time and it returns the same result as view.Just give me an idea about table-valued function and View, in terms of perfomance. Which one is better?
I have two control page in my aspx page. first one left side "tree view",second one right side " form design".Form design will change based on tree view selected index changed.i have 4 level child node(site, master , slave, space). I have seperate forms to each level of node.
cannot update tree node when update the forms. so i reload tree view.
now i need how to auto selected index change to tree node.
ex.
1 parent node
1.1 child node
1.2 child node
i have update "1.2 child node" rename to "1.3 child node"
and reload treeview so it will chage...
how set tree node.selected index = 1.3 child node....
I am not understanding why I am getting the following error (also mentioned in the subject line). I have written the following function in SQL Server 2005:
CREATE FUNCTION dbo.GetCandateID() RETURNS INT AS BEGIN declare @candidate_id int SELECT @candidate_id = max(c.candidate_id) from dbo.candidates c if(@candidate_id is null) set @candidate_id = 1001 else set @candidate_id = @candidate_id + 1 return @candidate_id END
The function compiled properly. I have used the above function like below in the query:
select dbo.GetCandidateID()
I am getting the following error: Cannot find either column "dbo" or the user-defined function or aggregate "dbo.GetCandidateID", or the name is ambiguous
i have the following problem concerning the index::
my source code::
[Code]...
the problem is appeared when i have added the pager to my list view ,,i have out of range for index exception ... how to determine the page iam in and specify the right index either i use list view or grid view or other such controls..
I have a gridview with dynamic buttons for edit and save.Save button is disable by default. In the edit button command argument i bind the id of the record.
now when i click edit button i want my save button to get enable and edit button will disable for that particular row. I dont kow how to get the selected row index through dynamic button.
i am trying to create connection using OLEDB connection in my app. but i am not able to create the connection as in datasource i want to use Server.mappath, but cudn't find the right method to use it. i am trying to make connection with Access database file. following is code i have tried:
string path = Server.MapPath("~/uploadaccess/Production.mdb"); string ConnectionString = @"Provider=Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0; Data Source=" & Server.MapPath("~/uploadaccess/Production.mdb")&";"; and also OleDbConnection myConnection = new OleDbConnection("Provider=Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0;Data Source=" & path&";"); and tried this OleDbConnection myConnection = new OleDbConnection("Provider=Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0;Data Source=" & Server.MapPath("~/uploadaccess/Production.mdb"));
and this is the error i am getting:
Operator '&' cannot be applied to operands of type 'string' and 'string'
When I am creating Strongly Typed View I get lots of Classes in View Data Drop down. Classes like Automapper, ninject, Interface..., latebound... Due this its very hard to find my project classes. Is there any way to restrict dropdown to only display my project classes?
When using the "add view" dialog in vwd is there a common practice for presenting any primary key fields as readonly to the user in the view?
By default it appears the user could change the key field value (as it is presented in a textbox) and overwrite data for that record for which the key was accidentally changed to.
Do we have to store the original record's key and then make the key presented as a label and then on the update subtitute the original key value back in for the record? Or is there something simpler?
i have a drop down list and a text box, inside a listview row (and this is a repeating layout). i populate each dropdownlist with same contents ( these contents/items come from a custom collection object).
i have added a required field validator in the listview's item template, that has its validation group = the validation group of the drop down list, and validates if the textbox is blank or not. this validation takes place on the selected index changed of the drop downlist for that row.
1. on selected index changed, EACH dropdownlist validates only its corressponding textbox perfectly (which is what i want)
but if i enter some text in one of the textboxes after doing 1, the dropdownlist for THAT particular row, assigns the correct value to the text entered. but for other rows (for which i changed their corresponding ddls to test the required field validation and for which the text boxes are still blank), their ddls by itself assign the values to the blank text without validating.
markup of code for listview is [Code]....
code behind for the ddl selected index changed is [Code]....
method GetIndexFromId retrieves index of the custom object inside a collection depending on the Id (which is a property) of the object.
i notice that the ddl selectedindexchanged is being hit as many number of times as many rows i change (i.e as many ddls in different rows i change to check the required field validation)
I single table in SQL Server having 50 columns col_1 to col_50 having type varchar(MAX)..The table is having nearly 2 crore data into it which is unstructured i.e. just put in by bulk copy. I have to perform search operation on this table. How to index the table so as to make the search fast? or any other way to make the search fast.