|
anyone has the URL for the english official forum of PostgreSQL NOT the Postgre Advanced Server..
|
|
|
|
|
jrahma wrote: anyone has the URL
And you want to use a database product that you cannot even find the URL for. What level of support do you think you are going to get for this DB. Oh wait, you are looking here, a MS centric site, for support 
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Mycroft Holmes wrote: Oh wait, you are looking here, a MS centric site, for support
Thanks, good point, I could not fathom why the question got down voted. I guess I look at things too narrowly.
|
|
|
|
|
djj55 wrote: I could not fathom why the question got down voted
Some twat who probably has not heard of Postgre.
I nearly got involved in it in the 90s but chose Access spit instead and from there went naturally into SQL Server. I had just spent some years working with SuperBase only to have it sold 5 times in as many years and it got totally marginalised. I'll stick to mainstream!
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
How can I deploy PostgreSQL database in InstallShield 2010 so it will install the database server and create my database as well?
|
|
|
|
|
how can I create a script for the entire database inPostgreSQL including the structure, rows, functions, views, etc?
|
|
|
|
|
You could use PgAdminIII and it's database backup function. This allows you to select which objects you would like to re-create. This could then be run using restore from either PgAdmin or the command line, depending on your requirements
|
|
|
|
|
I have a demo application that uses SQL Server via ADO to create and populate a database. I connect to the master database and then execute a "CREATE DATABASE ..." SQL statement. Here is the connect:
bool CMsSqlDemoView::Connect(LPCTSTR szDatabase)
{
Disconnect();
m_DBConnection.CreateInstance(__uuidof(Connection));
if (!m_DBConnection)
{
m_listErrors.AddString("Failed to create ADO::Connection instance");
return(false);
}
m_DBConnection->CursorLocation = adUseClient;
// Note: The "sqloledb" provider does not fully support XML.
// For XML support, the Provider and DataTypeCompatibility values must be set as indicated.
CString strConnection;
strConnection.Format(
"Provider=SQLNCLI10;DataTypeCompatibility=80;Integrated Security=SSPI;Data Source=%s;Database=%s;Trusted_Connection=Yes;",
m_strDataSource.GetString(),
szDatabase);
HRESULT hr = E_FAIL;
bool bResult = true;
try
{
hr = m_DBConnection->Open(strConnection.GetString(), "", "", adConnectUnspecified);
}
catch(_com_error &e)
{
CString strText;
strText.Format("Error code '%d' : '%s'", e.Error(), (LPCTSTR)e.Description());
m_listErrors.AddString(strText);
bResult = false;
}
return(bResult);
}
So far so good. I have now created a second demo application that uses SQL Server CE 3.5. I set the provider as "Microsoft.SQLSERVER.CE.OLEDB.3.5" but I am unable to create a connection object, and I have no idea how to create a database since I cannot connect to a master database. Anyone know how to do this (C++)? Thanks. BY the way I don't want to use managed C++, or OLEDB.
modified on Tuesday, October 26, 2010 8:52 AM
|
|
|
|
|
In case anyone else needs the answer, I had to use the MS_ADOX::_Catalog COM interface which is imported from msadox.dll. For example:
MS_ADOX::_CatalogPtr catalogPtr;
catalogPtr.CreateInstance(__uuidof(MS_ADOX::Catalog));
catalogPtr->Create("Provider=Microsoft.SQLSERVER.CE.OLEDB.3.5;Data Source=C:\\Temp\\sqlcedemo.sdf;");
The above crap non error checking code creates the C:\\Temp\\sqlcedemo.sdf database, which can then be opened and populated using ADO in the normal fashion.
|
|
|
|
|
is there an advantage to laying out fields of certain data types in a particular order?
For example, in MS Access 2007, is it best to have all Memo fields at the end of the table definition?
Thanks,
JJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While there is no technical benifit I have always followed these rules
Primary keys is the first field (I almost never use complex keys) and is usually an identity or a GUID inder duress
Foreign key fields (you know all this ####ID fields)
Primary description field(s)
All other fields
Modified and ModifiedBy are generally the last 2 fields on most tables.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Even though it may look nicer to have columns sorted in a particular order, sooner or later you will have no influence on the order any more. For as far as I know it is not possible to insert a column inbetween to existing columns without dropping the entire table and recreating it, which in most large live systems is a big no no as it cost way to much time to do.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Scenario:
I have a database which is going to be replicated via a set of web services. The web services will select all records where [AwaitingSync] = true. I have cerated two triggers for each table which sets [AwaitingSync] to true when a record is inserted or updated. The web service then sets [AwaitingSync] to false for all records.
Problem:
Due to a combination of my inexperience and lack of thought there is a slight problem(you'ver probably already noticed what the problem is!). After synching, when the web service sets [AwaitingSync] to false the update trigger fires and sets it back to true! 
My question is this then; what can I do about this? Can I add a conditional statement to the trigger so that it only fires if a particular column is being updated(or not being updated in this case). Or maybe the trigger be temporarily disabled while the [AwaitingSync] column is being updated. Or are there any other solutions to this?
Thanks for your time.
EDIT: Think I've found a solution but I would still appreciate your views if there is a better way of doing this. I have modified the trigger to check the value of [AwaitingSync] before updating.
IF(SELECT [AwaitingSync] FROM DELETED) = 0
BEGIN
UPDATE tblProductCategories
SET [DateModified] = GetDate(),
[AwaitingSync] = 1
WHERE [ID] = (SELECT [ID] FROM INSERTED)
END
modified on Monday, October 25, 2010 11:21 AM
|
|
|
|
|
Your update trigger should exclude the column [Awaiting Synch] from the list of columns that the trigger should fire on. 
Chris Meech
I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar]
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra]
|
|
|
|
|
Ah! I didn't realise that you could specify what columns fired the trigger.
This is the current trigger definition:
CREATE TRIGGER [dbo].[trgProductCategoriesUPDATE]
ON [dbo].[tblProductCategories]
AFTER UPDATE
AS
BEGIN
-- SET NOCOUNT ON added to prevent extra result sets from
-- interfering with SELECT statements.
SET NOCOUNT ON;
UPDATE tblProductCategories
SET [DateModified] = GetDate(),
[AwaitingSync] = 1
WHERE [ID] = (SELECT [ID] FROM INSERTED)
END
Which fires when any column is updated.
Are you saying that it should look something like this:
CREATE TRIGGER [dbo].[trgProductCategoriesUPDATE]
ON [dbo].[tblProductCategories]
AFTER UPDATE
AS
BEGIN
-- SET NOCOUNT ON added to prevent extra result sets from
-- interfering with SELECT statements.
SET NOCOUNT ON;
IF UPDATE(CategoryName)
BEGIN
UPDATE tblProductCategories
SET [DateModified] = GetDate(),
[AwaitingSync] = 1
WHERE [ID] = (SELECT [ID] FROM INSERTED)
END
END
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Yes that is correct. I'm not familiar with the SQL Server flavour of doing things, but when defining a trigger you can specify a list of columns as opposed to the entire table, that the trigger is fired on. Glad that has helped you out.
Chris Meech
I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar]
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra]
|
|
|
|
|
Is is my first time i touching SQL server.
I'm using sql server 2008 express.
I created simple table using Management studio - and i connected to the table from C# code using dataGridView.
I have small simple question ...
1. How can i define a new SP that can take parameters from C# code and how can i call it from C# code ??
2. I add some new raw from the dataGridView - and i don't know why they are not save in the database ( i try to call 'AcceptChanges' - but still this is not working ) .
Thanks for the help.
modified on Monday, October 25, 2010 8:43 AM
|
|
|
|
|
Yanshof wrote: dataGridView
Yuck.
If all you're doing is seeing that it can be done, then use a DataAdapter's Fill and Update methods to move data between the Grid and the database. But it only works for very simple data and you will soon find that that technique is not appropriate for real applications.
For one thing, Grids are generally not a proper way to get user input -- can you imagine an eCommerce site where you placed orders by filling in columns in a grid? No, you should define a form for entering and editing data. You can use a Grid with a subset of the data to allow the user to locate the record he wishes to edit, but never edit within a Grid.
For actual applications you will need a Data Access Layer. A layered application makes swapping parts in and out easier. For instance, at some future time you may want the client to access the database via a Web Service -- if your client is too-tightly bound to your database, that will be much more difficult.
"A stitch in time saves nine." Learn to use proper data access techniques now, before you really need them.
Here[^]'s an article I wrote on one of my data access techniques.
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: never edit within a Grid.
And I would say to that: Never say "never". Without disputing the general thrust of your post, there are occassions when it makes perfect sennse to edit directly wihtin a grid, particularly if the underlying dataset has only a small number of "simple" fields (strings of limited length, or enum types from which the user has to choose for example.) One can (and should) still separate out the data access code into its own class, or layer, but as far as the user is cnncerned the editing can take place right there in the grid.
It all depends on the exact situation, of course, but solutions should fit the problem; one shouldn't force a problem to fit a pre-determined solution.
Just my tuppenceworth.
|
|
|
|
|
In a couple of places I have allowed editing with a Grid, but only out of laziness to allow a knowledgable administrator to configure certain things, never for an average user to muck around with.
|
|
|
|
|
NeverHeardOfMe wrote: And I would say to that: Never say "never"
I have 1 very rigid rule, if you need to edit more than 1 field you will NEVER get a grid approved - go back and do the job properly. If you have only 1 field to edit I want a 3 page justification for not popping a dialog.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Why is there such an objection to (simple) editing within a grid? Suppose you have a CMS used by the client to set up his shop. On one page you allow him to define "sections" - eg, "Toys", "Clothes", "Tools".. whatever. So what would be so wrong in displaying a grid of said sections and allowing him to edit their names there and then, and even add a new section via the footer row? I don't want a dialog for that, and I don't want to load a new page just to do this simple task, nor load the entire "section page" listing its name, sub-sections and/or items within it just to do it either.
The trouble with dialogs in web-apps is that they come at a price - either you need the overhead of fancy javascript to create a modal one that also updates the calling page when closed (and, in the case of adding a new section will maybe need to redirect elsewhere too), or you run the risk of pop-up blockers getting in the way, or it openeing in a new tab and the client wondering what's happened.
I don't see the necessity to take a strict "never edit in a griod" attitude. I quite accept it should be used only in limited cases, but not "never".
|
|
|
|
|
NeverHeardOfMe wrote: The trouble with dialogs in web-apps
I was pretty sure the OP was about a datagridview, and yes web apps have a different set of rules.
My primary problem is that most junior devs want to do everything in a grid, which is fine when there are VERY limited interactions required. As soon as the interaction goes past the trivial they find the limitations of DGV editing.
I am finding with Silverlight I can treat the web much like a winforms app, pop a dialog whenever I need to let the user edit the data.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
