Change local variable inside query

/*Given*/

CREATE TABLE [_T1sub] (
[PK] [int] IDENTITY (1, 1) NOT NULL ,
[FK] [int] NULL ,
[St] [char] (2) NULL ,
[Wt] [int] NULL ,
CONSTRAINT [PK__T1sub] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED
(
[PK]
) ON [PRIMARY]
) ON [PRIMARY]
GO

INSERT INTO _T1sub (FK,St,Wt) VALUES (1,'id',10)
INSERT INTO _T1sub (FK,St,Wt) VALUES (2,'nv',20)
INSERT INTO _T1sub (FK,St,Wt) VALUES (3,'wa',30)

/*
Is something like the following possible.
The point is to change the value of the variable
inside the query and use it in the calculated field.

This doesn't compile of course, but is there
a way to accomplish the same thing?
*/

DECLARE @.ndx int

SET @.ndx = 1

SELECT

(a.FK+ (CASE WHEN @.ndx > 0
THEN (SELECT @.ndx = b.Wt
FROM _T1sub b
WHERE b.Wt = a.Wt)
ELSE 0 END)
) as FKplusWT

FROM _T1sub a

/*Output would look like this:*/

FKplusWT
----
11
22
33

/*
I know, I can get this output just by adding
FK+WT. This is not about that.
This is about setting vars inside a query
*/

thanks, Otto PorterOn Sat, 02 Oct 2004 12:20:48 -0600, Otto Porter wrote:

>I know, I can get this output just by adding
>FK+WT. This is not about that.
>This is about setting vars inside a query

Hi Otto,

It's not possible to change the value of a variable during the execution
of a SELECT statement. At least not the way you are trying to do it.

You can of course do
SELECT @.var = ..., @.var = ...
FROM table
WHERE ...
but I assume that this is not what you want. You can't mix this format of
the SELECT statement with a SELECT that outputs a result set.

The way I read your example, it would be very easy to have queries where
the result would be dependent on the order in which rows are processed by
SQL Server. Since SQL Server is entirely free in it's choice of processing
order, the results would be unexpected and might even vary from execution
to execution.

Check out the following link to find some good examples of the possible
effects of unexpected processing order on assignments with the SELECT
statement:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=...FTNGP12.phx.gbl

Best, Hugo
--

(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)sql

Change Local Subscription to Global

Does anyone know how to change a local pull subscription in merge
replication to a global subscription? I tried using
"sp_changemergesubscription" which is executed at the publisher according to
BOL and set a priority other than zero, but I get an error that says a local
subscription cannot be changed to a global subscription.
Is there something I need to execute at the subscriber?
Thanks.
Bill
Hi Bill,
From your descriptions, I understood that you would like to change local
subscription to global subscription. Have I understood you? Correct me if I
was wrong.
Based on my knowledge, unfortunately, we are not able to perform such
changes. We could select local subscription or gloabl subscription when
creating the subscription, however as the error message shows, we cannot
modify it. If you want to do so, you will have to delete the subscription
and then recreate it.
Thank you for your patience and corporation. If you have any questions or
concerns, don't hesitate to let me know. We are always here to be of
assistance!
Sincerely yours,
Michael Cheng
Microsoft Online Partner Support
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
================================================== ===
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
|||Thank you, Michael. I suspected this was the case, but it is good to get it
verified.
I am doing some testing on setting up an alternate synchronization partner,
and having some trouble with it, so I'll likely have another post on that
issue soon.
Thanks again.
Bill
"Michael Cheng [MSFT]" <v-mingqc@.online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:VAcGvVSJFHA.132@.TK2MSFTNGXA02.phx.gbl...
> Hi Bill,
> From your descriptions, I understood that you would like to change local
> subscription to global subscription. Have I understood you? Correct me if
> I
> was wrong.
> Based on my knowledge, unfortunately, we are not able to perform such
> changes. We could select local subscription or gloabl subscription when
> creating the subscription, however as the error message shows, we cannot
> modify it. If you want to do so, you will have to delete the subscription
> and then recreate it.
> Thank you for your patience and corporation. If you have any questions or
> concerns, don't hesitate to let me know. We are always here to be of
> assistance!
>
> Sincerely yours,
> Michael Cheng
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
> When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
> that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
> ================================================== ===
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
>
|||Hi Bill,
Thank you for the kindly separate the issue. I have taken that one and am
doing some research on it, I will update you as soon as possible when I
find anything useful to add.
Sincerely yours,
Michael Cheng
Microsoft Online Partner Support
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
================================================== ===
Business-Critical Phone Support (BCPS) provides you with technical phone
support at no charge during critical LAN outages or "business down"
situations. This benefit is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to all
Microsoft technology partners in the United States and Canada.
This and other support options are available here:
BCPS:
https://partner.microsoft.com/US/tec...rview/40010469
Others: https://partner.microsoft.com/US/tec...pportoverview/
If you are outside the United States, please visit our International
Support page: http://support.microsoft.com/common/international.aspx
================================================== ===
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Change local connection string on remote server

Hello,

I have searched every post and tried every connection string there but can't figure out how to connect to my database on my remote server. I am using Visual Developer 2005 Express Edition in C# and uploading it to a Windows server running asp.net 2.0. The domain has not resolved yet.

I am so new to this and have followed many tutorials step by step but none of them address this issue. They just show how to upload it to the server.

Do I need to use the SQL server provided by my host or can the database stay in the App_Data folder?

My local connection string works locally:

<add name="ConnectionString" connectionString="Data Source=.\SQLEXPRESS;AttachDbFilename=|DataDirectory|\add_newSQL.mdf;Integrated Security=True;User Instance=True"
providerName="System.Data.SqlClient" />

When I uploaded to my server I changed \SQLEXPRESS to (local) as advised in the forum.

<add name="ConnectionString" connectionString="Data Source=(local);AttachDbFilename=|DataDirectory|\add_newSQL.mdf;Integrated Security=True;User Instance=True"

providerName="System.Data.SqlClient" />

When I debug a page I get the <customErrors mode="Off"/>
error message even thought I have already set it in my remote web.config file which may be causing problems itself:

<configuration>

<appSettings/>

<connectionStrings>

<add name="ConnectionString" connectionString="Data Source=(local);AttachDbFilename=|DataDirectory|\add_newSQL.mdf;Integrated Security=True;User Instance=True"

providerName="System.Data.SqlClient" />

</connectionStrings>

<system.web>

<customErrors mode="Off" />

<compilation debug="false" />

<authentication mode="Windows" />

</system.web>

</configuration>

Thanks for any help you can offer. I wish I could find someone to hire to do this part for me or teach me how over the phone. Any suggestions?

You are running SQL Express on your development system (your local computer). Are you running SQL Express on the web server?

Thanks,
Bryan

|||Having this same, problem!!!!!|||So the same question to you, as the question wasn′t answered by the original poster, are you running SQL Server Express on the WebServer ?

Jens K. Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de

Change dbowner on database

We recently renamed the local administrator account on our server from
administrator to boaadmin. And now we need to change dbo owner for a
database becauase the dbase is still using the name administrator for
the dbo.
I ran the process :
sp_changedbowner boaadmin
but it gives the following error. Am I doing something wrong, since I'm
a bit new to SQL...
Server: Msg 15007, Level 16, State 1, Procedure sp_changedbowner, Line
33 The login 'boaaladmin' does not exist.
When I ran the process in Query Analyzer I'm using the id boaadmin to
login...
I finally managed to execute the command without errors I had to add
the machine domain in front of the it servername\boaadmin.
After executing the command it returned "aliases were mapped to the new
database owner. database owner changed".
But when I look inside the dbase user's the dbo doesn't have a login
name associated with it. Previously it was servername\administrator and
now its just blank.
I've ran the sp_changedbowner twice and it still doesn't allocate the
id servername\boaadmin to dbo.
I even tried recreating the database using boaadmin, but find that the
dbowner is still the servername\administrator account.
Can'tr figure out why....Hi
If you renamed the account then the SID has not changed, the probably means
that sysxlogins has not be changed. You may want to try calling sp_grantlogi
n
for boaadmin and sp_revokelogin for administrator.
What does sp_change_users_login 'report' give on the database?
I also noticed that the error message for sp_changedbowner refers to
'boaaladmin'
John
"Zeno" wrote:

> We recently renamed the local administrator account on our server from
> administrator to boaadmin. And now we need to change dbo owner for a
> database becauase the dbase is still using the name administrator for
> the dbo.
>
> I ran the process :
> sp_changedbowner boaadmin
>
> but it gives the following error. Am I doing something wrong, since I'm
> a bit new to SQL...
>
> Server: Msg 15007, Level 16, State 1, Procedure sp_changedbowner, Line
> 33 The login 'boaaladmin' does not exist.
>
> When I ran the process in Query Analyzer I'm using the id boaadmin to
> login...
> I finally managed to execute the command without errors I had to add
> the machine domain in front of the it servername\boaadmin.
>
> After executing the command it returned "aliases were mapped to the new
> database owner. database owner changed".
>
> But when I look inside the dbase user's the dbo doesn't have a login
> name associated with it. Previously it was servername\administrator and
> now its just blank.
>
> I've ran the sp_changedbowner twice and it still doesn't allocate the
> id servername\boaadmin to dbo.
>
> I even tried recreating the database using boaadmin, but find that the
> dbowner is still the servername\administrator account.
> Can'tr figure out why....
>|||Zeno,
Does 'machinename\boaaladmin' have a login in SQL Server? Create the login
and try again. I see no reason why it shouldn't work.
Mark Allison, SQL Server MVP
http://www.markallison.co.uk
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602m.html
"Zeno" wrote:

> We recently renamed the local administrator account on our server from
> administrator to boaadmin. And now we need to change dbo owner for a
> database becauase the dbase is still using the name administrator for
> the dbo.
>
> I ran the process :
> sp_changedbowner boaadmin
>
> but it gives the following error. Am I doing something wrong, since I'm
> a bit new to SQL...
>
> Server: Msg 15007, Level 16, State 1, Procedure sp_changedbowner, Line
> 33 The login 'boaaladmin' does not exist.
>
> When I ran the process in Query Analyzer I'm using the id boaadmin to
> login...
> I finally managed to execute the command without errors I had to add
> the machine domain in front of the it servername\boaadmin.
>
> After executing the command it returned "aliases were mapped to the new
> database owner. database owner changed".
>
> But when I look inside the dbase user's the dbo doesn't have a login
> name associated with it. Previously it was servername\administrator and
> now its just blank.
>
> I've ran the sp_changedbowner twice and it still doesn't allocate the
> id servername\boaadmin to dbo.
>
> I even tried recreating the database using boaadmin, but find that the
> dbowner is still the servername\administrator account.
> Can'tr figure out why....
>|||Zeno
Is there a speciffic reason why you don't want your database and objects
owned by SA. With any other owner you will find some utilities and commands
will not run as you expect. I have in the past inherited databases not owned
by sa and they can be a right pain.
You need to limit access to sa, but generally your life will be much easier.
Regards
John
"Mark Allison" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Zeno,
> Does 'machinename\boaaladmin' have a login in SQL Server? Create the login
> and try again. I see no reason why it shouldn't work.
> --
> Mark Allison, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.markallison.co.uk
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602m.html
>
> "Zeno" wrote:
>

Change dbowner on database

We recently renamed the local administrator account on our server from
administrator to boaadmin. And now we need to change dbo owner for a
database becauase the dbase is still using the name administrator for
the dbo.
I ran the process :
sp_changedbowner boaadmin
but it gives the following error. Am I doing something wrong, since I'm
a bit new to SQL...
Server: Msg 15007, Level 16, State 1, Procedure sp_changedbowner, Line
33 The login 'boaaladmin' does not exist.
When I ran the process in Query Analyzer I'm using the id boaadmin to
login...
I finally managed to execute the command without errors I had to add
the machine domain in front of the it servername\boaadmin.
After executing the command it returned "aliases were mapped to the new
database owner. database owner changed".
But when I look inside the dbase user's the dbo doesn't have a login
name associated with it. Previously it was servername\administrator and
now its just blank.
I've ran the sp_changedbowner twice and it still doesn't allocate the
id servername\boaadmin to dbo.
I even tried recreating the database using boaadmin, but find that the
dbowner is still the servername\administrator account.
Can'tr figure out why....
Hi
If you renamed the account then the SID has not changed, the probably means
that sysxlogins has not be changed. You may want to try calling sp_grantlogin
for boaadmin and sp_revokelogin for administrator.
What does sp_change_users_login 'report' give on the database?
I also noticed that the error message for sp_changedbowner refers to
'boaaladmin'
John
"Zeno" wrote:

> We recently renamed the local administrator account on our server from
> administrator to boaadmin. And now we need to change dbo owner for a
> database becauase the dbase is still using the name administrator for
> the dbo.
>
> I ran the process :
> sp_changedbowner boaadmin
>
> but it gives the following error. Am I doing something wrong, since I'm
> a bit new to SQL...
>
> Server: Msg 15007, Level 16, State 1, Procedure sp_changedbowner, Line
> 33 The login 'boaaladmin' does not exist.
>
> When I ran the process in Query Analyzer I'm using the id boaadmin to
> login...
> I finally managed to execute the command without errors I had to add
> the machine domain in front of the it servername\boaadmin.
>
> After executing the command it returned "aliases were mapped to the new
> database owner. database owner changed".
>
> But when I look inside the dbase user's the dbo doesn't have a login
> name associated with it. Previously it was servername\administrator and
> now its just blank.
>
> I've ran the sp_changedbowner twice and it still doesn't allocate the
> id servername\boaadmin to dbo.
>
> I even tried recreating the database using boaadmin, but find that the
> dbowner is still the servername\administrator account.
> Can'tr figure out why....
>
|||Zeno,
Does 'machinename\boaaladmin' have a login in SQL Server? Create the login
and try again. I see no reason why it shouldn't work.
Mark Allison, SQL Server MVP
http://www.markallison.co.uk
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602m.html
"Zeno" wrote:

> We recently renamed the local administrator account on our server from
> administrator to boaadmin. And now we need to change dbo owner for a
> database becauase the dbase is still using the name administrator for
> the dbo.
>
> I ran the process :
> sp_changedbowner boaadmin
>
> but it gives the following error. Am I doing something wrong, since I'm
> a bit new to SQL...
>
> Server: Msg 15007, Level 16, State 1, Procedure sp_changedbowner, Line
> 33 The login 'boaaladmin' does not exist.
>
> When I ran the process in Query Analyzer I'm using the id boaadmin to
> login...
> I finally managed to execute the command without errors I had to add
> the machine domain in front of the it servername\boaadmin.
>
> After executing the command it returned "aliases were mapped to the new
> database owner. database owner changed".
>
> But when I look inside the dbase user's the dbo doesn't have a login
> name associated with it. Previously it was servername\administrator and
> now its just blank.
>
> I've ran the sp_changedbowner twice and it still doesn't allocate the
> id servername\boaadmin to dbo.
>
> I even tried recreating the database using boaadmin, but find that the
> dbowner is still the servername\administrator account.
> Can'tr figure out why....
>
|||Zeno
Is there a speciffic reason why you don't want your database and objects
owned by SA. With any other owner you will find some utilities and commands
will not run as you expect. I have in the past inherited databases not owned
by sa and they can be a right pain.
You need to limit access to sa, but generally your life will be much easier.
Regards
John
"Mark Allison" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Zeno,
> Does 'machinename\boaaladmin' have a login in SQL Server? Create the login
> and try again. I see no reason why it shouldn't work.
> --
> Mark Allison, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.markallison.co.uk
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602m.html
>
> "Zeno" wrote:

Change dbowner on database

We recently renamed the local administrator account on our server from
administrator to boaadmin. And now we need to change dbo owner for a
database becauase the dbase is still using the name administrator for
the dbo.
I ran the process :
sp_changedbowner boaadmin
but it gives the following error. Am I doing something wrong, since I'm
a bit new to SQL...
Server: Msg 15007, Level 16, State 1, Procedure sp_changedbowner, Line
33 The login 'boaaladmin' does not exist.
When I ran the process in Query Analyzer I'm using the id boaadmin to
login...
I finally managed to execute the command without errors I had to add
the machine domain in front of the it servername\boaadmin.
After executing the command it returned "aliases were mapped to the new
database owner. database owner changed".
But when I look inside the dbase user's the dbo doesn't have a login
name associated with it. Previously it was servername\administrator and
now its just blank.
I've ran the sp_changedbowner twice and it still doesn't allocate the
id servername\boaadmin to dbo.
I even tried recreating the database using boaadmin, but find that the
dbowner is still the servername\administrator account.
Can'tr figure out why....Hi
If you renamed the account then the SID has not changed, the probably means
that sysxlogins has not be changed. You may want to try calling sp_grantlogin
for boaadmin and sp_revokelogin for administrator.
What does sp_change_users_login 'report' give on the database?
I also noticed that the error message for sp_changedbowner refers to
'boaaladmin'
John
"Zeno" wrote:
> We recently renamed the local administrator account on our server from
> administrator to boaadmin. And now we need to change dbo owner for a
> database becauase the dbase is still using the name administrator for
> the dbo.
>
> I ran the process :
> sp_changedbowner boaadmin
>
> but it gives the following error. Am I doing something wrong, since I'm
> a bit new to SQL...
>
> Server: Msg 15007, Level 16, State 1, Procedure sp_changedbowner, Line
> 33 The login 'boaaladmin' does not exist.
>
> When I ran the process in Query Analyzer I'm using the id boaadmin to
> login...
> I finally managed to execute the command without errors I had to add
> the machine domain in front of the it servername\boaadmin.
>
> After executing the command it returned "aliases were mapped to the new
> database owner. database owner changed".
>
> But when I look inside the dbase user's the dbo doesn't have a login
> name associated with it. Previously it was servername\administrator and
> now its just blank.
>
> I've ran the sp_changedbowner twice and it still doesn't allocate the
> id servername\boaadmin to dbo.
>
> I even tried recreating the database using boaadmin, but find that the
> dbowner is still the servername\administrator account.
> Can'tr figure out why....
>|||Zeno,
Does 'machinename\boaaladmin' have a login in SQL Server? Create the login
and try again. I see no reason why it shouldn't work.
--
Mark Allison, SQL Server MVP
http://www.markallison.co.uk
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602m.html
"Zeno" wrote:
> We recently renamed the local administrator account on our server from
> administrator to boaadmin. And now we need to change dbo owner for a
> database becauase the dbase is still using the name administrator for
> the dbo.
>
> I ran the process :
> sp_changedbowner boaadmin
>
> but it gives the following error. Am I doing something wrong, since I'm
> a bit new to SQL...
>
> Server: Msg 15007, Level 16, State 1, Procedure sp_changedbowner, Line
> 33 The login 'boaaladmin' does not exist.
>
> When I ran the process in Query Analyzer I'm using the id boaadmin to
> login...
> I finally managed to execute the command without errors I had to add
> the machine domain in front of the it servername\boaadmin.
>
> After executing the command it returned "aliases were mapped to the new
> database owner. database owner changed".
>
> But when I look inside the dbase user's the dbo doesn't have a login
> name associated with it. Previously it was servername\administrator and
> now its just blank.
>
> I've ran the sp_changedbowner twice and it still doesn't allocate the
> id servername\boaadmin to dbo.
>
> I even tried recreating the database using boaadmin, but find that the
> dbowner is still the servername\administrator account.
> Can'tr figure out why....
>|||Zeno
Is there a speciffic reason why you don't want your database and objects
owned by SA. With any other owner you will find some utilities and commands
will not run as you expect. I have in the past inherited databases not owned
by sa and they can be a right pain.
You need to limit access to sa, but generally your life will be much easier.
Regards
John
"Mark Allison" wrote:
> Zeno,
> Does 'machinename\boaaladmin' have a login in SQL Server? Create the login
> and try again. I see no reason why it shouldn't work.
> --
> Mark Allison, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.markallison.co.uk
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602m.html
>
> "Zeno" wrote:
> > We recently renamed the local administrator account on our server from
> > administrator to boaadmin. And now we need to change dbo owner for a
> > database becauase the dbase is still using the name administrator for
> > the dbo.
> >
> >
> > I ran the process :
> > sp_changedbowner boaadmin
> >
> >
> > but it gives the following error. Am I doing something wrong, since I'm
> > a bit new to SQL...
> >
> >
> > Server: Msg 15007, Level 16, State 1, Procedure sp_changedbowner, Line
> > 33 The login 'boaaladmin' does not exist.
> >
> >
> > When I ran the process in Query Analyzer I'm using the id boaadmin to
> > login...
> >
> > I finally managed to execute the command without errors I had to add
> > the machine domain in front of the it servername\boaadmin.
> >
> >
> > After executing the command it returned "aliases were mapped to the new
> > database owner. database owner changed".
> >
> >
> > But when I look inside the dbase user's the dbo doesn't have a login
> > name associated with it. Previously it was servername\administrator and
> > now its just blank.
> >
> >
> > I've ran the sp_changedbowner twice and it still doesn't allocate the
> > id servername\boaadmin to dbo.
> >
> >
> > I even tried recreating the database using boaadmin, but find that the
> > dbowner is still the servername\administrator account.
> >
> > Can'tr figure out why....
> >

change authentication method in a local database file

I have made a small asp.net project which uses a local database file as a part of the project. The project is running fine om my local machine, but when I upload it to the remote server, the login fails for the server.

I suspect this is can be solved by using sqlserver authentication. But I have now spent a lot of time trying to configure the database file to use this authentication mode. As I see it there are three possible solutions to the problem.

use management studio express to configure the local mdf file (Ecxept that I cant find out how to connect to the mdf-file) and from here change the authentication method to sqlserver authentication. use Visual Web developer to change the authentication method (but how?) make the windows authentication work on the server (this would probably require that mannamgement studio express connects to the remote database. (Same problem as no 1)

Help will be higly appreciated.

Bjarke

hi Bjarke,

to make things run, the account running the application server must be one of the SQL Server registered logins (at the instance level and not database level).. if your solution is hosted, I do think the IT stuff of the hosting company provides that "by default" or nothing would run, and I do not think they will grant you a standard SQL Server login... did you contact them?

regards

|||

Hello Andrea!

Maybe I have misunderstood something?

When you make an asp.net 2.0 project there is a folder (App_Data) where sit is possible via Visual web developer to add a sql database file. As I have understood it this file works as a little database server as well. Does SQL server even have to be installed on the server to make these files work as a database?

I have not contacted the hosting company about this problem, because I didnt consider it a problem. But Maybe I am wrong.

Do you know how to change the autnentication method for a local database file? I have tried a lot of things, and searched the internet for an answer, but without luck.

Thanks Bjarke

|||

hi Bjarke,

bjarke wrote:

Hello Andrea!

Maybe I have misunderstood something?

When you make an asp.net 2.0 project there is a folder (App_Data) where sit is possible via Visual web developer to add a sql database file. As I have understood it this file works as a little database server as well.

perhaps you are intending User Istances "mode", a feature available only with SQLExpress edition of SQL Server 2005.. remember that this feature is not provided by hoster that do not have SQLExpress but "traditional" SQL Server 2005 editions...

Does SQL server even have to be installed on the server to make these files work as a database?

yes, SQLExpress must be installed on the computer running the application, in your case the web application, thus the application server... when the app start's up, a User Instance of SQLExpress is generated (if not already existing)...

I have not contacted the hosting company about this problem, because I didnt consider it a problem. But Maybe I am wrong.

Do you know how to change the autnentication method for a local database file? I have tried a lot of things, and searched the internet for an answer, but without luck.

Thanks Bjarke

the "traditional" authentication "setting" can be changed using SSMSE, accessing the instance property, in the security tab or modifying a Windows registry key.. stay with the first one

the service must be restarted to use the new settings..

as regard user instances, only Windows authentication can be used with this "access mode"...

if you mean how to modify the authentication settings in the connection strings, you can have a look here..

regards

change (local) to localhost and what's the difference

Two questions
Once sql server has been installed how to change from (local) to
localhost or the other way arround from (local) to localhost? (currently
set (local) and want to change to localhost.
Secondly, what the hell is the difference between them. On development
machines I have installed sometimes localhost will not work but (local)
will. This is the case even when the hosts (<win>/system32/drivers/etc)
file has an entry like the following
127.0.0.1 localhost
Seems very confusing to have two different ways to refer the 'local
machine'
?
See my reply in the other group.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
"who" <whome@.spambucket.com> wrote in message news:4081E570.CF1AA587@.spambucket.com...
> Two questions
> Once sql server has been installed how to change from (local) to
> localhost or the other way arround from (local) to localhost? (currently
> set (local) and want to change to localhost.
> Secondly, what the hell is the difference between them. On development
> machines I have installed sometimes localhost will not work but (local)
> will. This is the case even when the hosts (<win>/system32/drivers/etc)
> file has an entry like the following
> 127.0.0.1 localhost
>
> Seems very confusing to have two different ways to refer the 'local
> machine'
> ?
>

change (local) to localhost and what's the difference

Two questions
Once sql server has been installed how to change from (local) to
localhost or the other way arround from (local) to localhost? (currently
set (local) and want to change to localhost.
Secondly, what the hell is the difference between them. On development
machines I have installed sometimes localhost will not work but (local)
will. This is the case even when the hosts (<win>/system32/drivers/etc)
file has an entry like the following
127.0.0.1 localhost
Seems very confusing to have two different ways to refer the 'local
machine'
?See my reply in the other group.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
"who" <whome@.spambucket.com> wrote in message news:4081E570.CF1AA587@.spambucket.com...
> Two questions
> Once sql server has been installed how to change from (local) to
> localhost or the other way arround from (local) to localhost? (currently
> set (local) and want to change to localhost.
> Secondly, what the hell is the difference between them. On development
> machines I have installed sometimes localhost will not work but (local)
> will. This is the case even when the hosts (<win>/system32/drivers/etc)
> file has an entry like the following
> 127.0.0.1 localhost
>
> Seems very confusing to have two different ways to refer the 'local
> machine'
> ?
>

change (local) to localhost and what's the difference

Two questions
Once sql server has been installed how to change from (local) to
localhost or the other way arround from (local) to localhost? (currently
set (local) and want to change to localhost.
Secondly, what the hell is the difference between them. On development
machines I have installed sometimes localhost will not work but (local)
will. This is the case even when the hosts (<win>/system32/drivers/etc)
file has an entry like the following
127.0.0.1 localhost
Seems very confusing to have two different ways to refer the 'local
machine'
?See my reply in the other group.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
"who" <whome@.spambucket.com> wrote in message news:4081E570.CF1AA587@.spambucket.com...[vbcol
=seagreen]
> Two questions
> Once sql server has been installed how to change from (local) to
> localhost or the other way arround from (local) to localhost? (currently
> set (local) and want to change to localhost.
> Secondly, what the hell is the difference between them. On development
> machines I have installed sometimes localhost will not work but (local)
> will. This is the case even when the hosts (<win>/system32/drivers/etc)
> file has an entry like the following
> 127.0.0.1 localhost
>
> Seems very confusing to have two different ways to refer the 'local
> machine'
> ?
>[/vbcol]

Centralised Database

Hi All,
I've been tasked at looking into a solution for a global data project for my
company.
The company uses some software that requires a local database, the local
databases are going to be located in Australia, US, & UK, the local database
s
will have exact copies of each others schema. They would like the UK &
Australia databases to update the US database (effectively making the US
database centralized).
Conceptually whats the best way of doing this? My thoughts would be to have
the 3 local databases and create an additional database to centralize the
three using DTS or replication... ...there would be no overlapping data in
any of the three databases (except identity based keys), however data would
be updated. The only caviate I have to adhere to is the centralized databas
e
must be no more than 30 minutes out of date (preferably no more than 15
minutes).
I've had a good year and half experience of being a DBA, but have never
really had to touch on replication and distributed data, so any thoughts or
views you have would be greatly appreciated.
Kind regards
BenI think your case is the simplest one, no data overlapping, you can use any
way to update data.
I would like use webservice, it is easy to control and no problem on any
firewall.
"BenUK" <BenUK@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:60AC4511-63FA-4709-A5BD-84A091750BD6@.microsoft.com...
> Hi All,
> I've been tasked at looking into a solution for a global data project for
my
> company.
> The company uses some software that requires a local database, the local
> databases are going to be located in Australia, US, & UK, the local
databases
> will have exact copies of each others schema. They would like the UK &
> Australia databases to update the US database (effectively making the US
> database centralized).
> Conceptually whats the best way of doing this? My thoughts would be to
have
> the 3 local databases and create an additional database to centralize the
> three using DTS or replication... ...there would be no overlapping data in
> any of the three databases (except identity based keys), however data
would
> be updated. The only caviate I have to adhere to is the centralized
database
> must be no more than 30 minutes out of date (preferably no more than 15
> minutes).
> I've had a good year and half experience of being a DBA, but have never
> really had to touch on replication and distributed data, so any thoughts
or
> views you have would be greatly appreciated.
> Kind regards
> Ben

Centralised Database

Hi All,
I've been tasked at looking into a solution for a global data project for my
company.
The company uses some software that requires a local database, the local
databases are going to be located in Australia, US, & UK, the local databases
will have exact copies of each others schema. They would like the UK &
Australia databases to update the US database (effectively making the US
database centralized).
Conceptually whats the best way of doing this? My thoughts would be to have
the 3 local databases and create an additional database to centralize the
three using DTS or replication... ...there would be no overlapping data in
any of the three databases (except identity based keys), however data would
be updated. The only caviate I have to adhere to is the centralized database
must be no more than 30 minutes out of date (preferably no more than 15
minutes).
I've had a good year and half experience of being a DBA, but have never
really had to touch on replication and distributed data, so any thoughts or
views you have would be greatly appreciated.
Kind regards
Ben
I think your case is the simplest one, no data overlapping, you can use any
way to update data.
I would like use webservice, it is easy to control and no problem on any
firewall.
"BenUK" <BenUK@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:60AC4511-63FA-4709-A5BD-84A091750BD6@.microsoft.com...
> Hi All,
> I've been tasked at looking into a solution for a global data project for
my
> company.
> The company uses some software that requires a local database, the local
> databases are going to be located in Australia, US, & UK, the local
databases
> will have exact copies of each others schema. They would like the UK &
> Australia databases to update the US database (effectively making the US
> database centralized).
> Conceptually whats the best way of doing this? My thoughts would be to
have
> the 3 local databases and create an additional database to centralize the
> three using DTS or replication... ...there would be no overlapping data in
> any of the three databases (except identity based keys), however data
would
> be updated. The only caviate I have to adhere to is the centralized
database
> must be no more than 30 minutes out of date (preferably no more than 15
> minutes).
> I've had a good year and half experience of being a DBA, but have never
> really had to touch on replication and distributed data, so any thoughts
or
> views you have would be greatly appreciated.
> Kind regards
> Ben