executing serial dts

hi,

i am new here and interested in how to :

- execute serial dts in one single action or using vb script.

- change the status (enabled to disabled) and schedule using vb script.

Many dts make me tired when i have to change the status and schedule one by one.

regards.

You don't need to be tired. Read more here:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/02/08/VBScriptandSQLServer2000/default.aspx

Executing N procedures in 1 Round trip

w/ SqlServer, is there anyway to pack a number of calls to the same stored procedure into a single round-trip to the DB short of dynamically writing a T-SQL block? For example, if I'm calling a procedure "Update Contact" which takes 2 params @.Campaign, @.Contact 20 times how would I pass in the values for those 20 diffrent versions?

You could pass all the parameters to another stored procedure as a delimited list and parse them over there, create a loop, and call the stored proc in the loop.

|||I'm sure I could. I just thought I'd heard of something similar to ODP.Net's ArrayBinding syntax for SqlServer. I'm fairly sure I wasnt thinking about bulkcopy.|||

To my knowledge I dont think there is any standardized way to make multiple calls in one trip. Perhaps someone else here knows if there's any new feature in 2005. I havent been doing much development in 2005.

|||hrm...

Will the SQL Server provider let me execute blocks of t-sql?

eg something like:

AddContact(@.C1, @.U1);
AddContact(@.C2, @.U2);
AddContact(@.C3, @.U3);
...
AddContact(@.CN, @.UN);
go;|||

Yes, however, you must specify that the call type is text, not stored procedure, and you must properly format your calls like:

EXECUTE AddContact @.C1,@.U1
EXECUTE AddContact @.C2,@.U2
...
GO

|||So what is the "proper" format for sp calls in a 'anonymous block'.

Executing multiple reports to form single document

Hi Everyone!
In my project I have lot of small small reports having the same criteria
e.g. Company and Years, the requirement here is to execute all these reports
and create a single document that can be delivered to customer's customer. I
am not able to find any such posting in this group or not able to find any
pointers on this.
Your help on this would be really appreciated.
Thanks in Advance
--
CloudsYou could use subreports as a way of combining your multiple reports. You
would have one "master" report that consisted of simply several subreports.
That would enable you to run the master and export it.
Mike G.
"Clouds" <Clouds@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:56C49443-0E2F-401A-B5B8-5D694B2D8780@.microsoft.com...
> Hi Everyone!
> In my project I have lot of small small reports having the same criteria
> e.g. Company and Years, the requirement here is to execute all these
> reports
> and create a single document that can be delivered to customer's customer.
> I
> am not able to find any such posting in this group or not able to find any
> pointers on this.
> Your help on this would be really appreciated.
> Thanks in Advance
> --
> Clouds

executing multiple procs at one go

Hi,

I would like to execute multiple stored procs by calling a single script say A. I want to A to execute on a nightly basis. The multiple stored procs are bulk inserts into separate tables. I want to be notified of the error if one among the many stored procs fail when I call A. But if one fails, I don't want A to fail. The remaining stored procs should execute. Does anyone have a script wriiten for A? I guess A is just not about -

EXEC SP1
EXEC SP2
EXEC SP3
EXEC SP4
EXEC SP5

Thankscreate proc dbo.A as
declare @.rc int, @.error int, @.cmd varchar(255)
set @.error = 0
EXEC @.rc = SP1
if @.rc != 0 set @.error = 1
EXEC @.rc = SP2
if @.rc != 0 set @.error = 2
EXEC @.rc = SP3
if @.rc != 0 set @.error = 3
EXEC @.rc = SP4
if @.rc != 0 set @.error = 4
EXEC @.rc = SP5
if @.rc != 0 set @.error = 5

if @.error = 1 begin
set @.cmd = 'Failed to execute SP' + cast(@.error as varchar(10))raiserror (@.cmd, 15, 1)
return (1)
end
return (0)|||Thanks. I shall test it soon and let you know if I have any problems.|||If more than one fails this logic will report the last one. In order to capture all failed you'll have to create a temp table (either # or @.) and insert a record with corresponding info after each SP fired. At the end of execution check for presence of rows in that table and if found, - construct the error message based on contents.|||Yeah, but if you have to rollback, your logging would rollback as well, and you'll have no idea...

echo out to a text file

Also some errors just raise and you can't trap them...I wonder what @.rc would be set to in those cases...NULL?

@.@.ERROR might be non zero in that case...

I'll have to test it...

Vivek: Let us know how it goes...

Executing commands in parallel

I have the need to run multiple SQL commands (like osql and bcp) in parallel
from a single bat file. To describe this a little clearer...
While executing a single .BAT file, I want to be able to execute 3 OSQL
commands in parallel. Currently I have to run these 3 serially and it takes
too long.
Is there any way from within a single bat file that I could have 3 OSQL
commands running at the same time?
Thanks in advance."TJT" <T_homas.T_odd@.smed.com> wrote in message
news:OHrmXephDHA.604@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I have the need to run multiple SQL commands (like osql and bcp) in
parallel
> from a single bat file. To describe this a little clearer...
> While executing a single .BAT file, I want to be able to execute 3 OSQL
> commands in parallel. Currently I have to run these 3 serially and it
takes
> too long.
> Is there any way from within a single bat file that I could have 3 OSQL
> commands running at the same time?
>
start osql.exe . . .
start osql.exe . . .
start osql.exe . . .
From a command prompt type
start /?
for help with the start command.
Davidsql

ExecuteSQL task fails and I think it should not

I setup my ExecuteSQL task to have a "Single Row" resultset. The query returns no rows. It fails. I don't think it should but then maybe this is consistent with the lookup transform piping rows down the error output if there is not a lookup value returned.

The error returned is

Error: 0xC002F309 at Execute SQL Task, Execute SQL Task: An error occurred while assigning a value to variable "Variable": "Single Row result set is specified, but no rows were returned.".
Thanks

AllanDoesn't sound right to me. If you were getting the MAX of something its perfectly plausible that no results would be returned (if no records in the table).

-Jamie|||Exactly |||Hmm... interesting. Can you open this on BetaPlace, please?

thanks!
ash|||I'm working with the realease version and having the same problem. Any answer to this?|||

The following discussion pertains to the Execute SQL Task Control flow.

THE SUGGESTIONS I MAKE ARE TO THE PROPERTIES WHICH YOU HAVE TO RIGHT CLICK AND GO TO PROPERTIES ON THE EXECUTE SQL TASK. DO NOT TRY TO CORRECT THIS PROBLEM IN THE EXECUTE SQL TASK EDITOR.

What you need to do is change the "ForceExecutionResults" property to "Success." This will fix your problem.

Secondly you need to be watchful of your MaximumErrorCount property else your system will fail out.

I hope this helps merry christmas.

|||

SELECT 0 + ISNULL((SELECT MAX( COLUMN1 ) FROM TABLE1 WHERE COLUMN2 = 'XXX'), 0)

OR

SELECT '' + ISNULL((SELECT COLUMN1 FROM TABLE1 WHERE COLUMN2 = 'XXX'), '')

doing so, you will always have a result the task can forward.

Not pretty but preferable vs. the ForceExecutionResults solution i think.

|||

It took me a while to find this thread that describes my problem. It appears that this has never been addressed as I am running SP1 and am still having the problem. I would have thought this was a fairly basic bug and would have been fixed by now. Any feedback about a permanent solution from the SSIS development team?

I also prefer the coded ISNULL workaround over setting the ForceExecutionResults property. You can also use the COALESCE function to the same effect, which I prefer for similar scenarios.

|||

highpockets wrote:

It took me a while to find this thread that describes my problem. It appears that this has never been addressed as I am running SP1 and am still having the problem. I would have thought this was a fairly basic bug and would have been fixed by now.

bug reports should be submitted here: http://connect.microsoft.com/feedback/default.aspx?SiteID=68

ExecuteSQL task fails and I think it should not

I setup my ExecuteSQL task to have a "Single Row" resultset. The query returns no rows. It fails. I don't think it should but then maybe this is consistent with the lookup transform piping rows down the error output if there is not a lookup value returned.

The error returned is

Error: 0xC002F309 at Execute SQL Task, Execute SQL Task: An error occurred while assigning a value to variable "Variable": "Single Row result set is specified, but no rows were returned.".
Thanks

AllanDoesn't sound right to me. If you were getting the MAX of something its perfectly plausible that no results would be returned (if no records in the table).

-Jamie|||Exactly |||Hmm... interesting. Can you open this on BetaPlace, please?

thanks!
ash|||I'm working with the realease version and having the same problem. Any answer to this?|||

The following discussion pertains to the Execute SQL Task Control flow.

THE SUGGESTIONS I MAKE ARE TO THE PROPERTIES WHICH YOU HAVE TO RIGHT CLICK AND GO TO PROPERTIES ON THE EXECUTE SQL TASK. DO NOT TRY TO CORRECT THIS PROBLEM IN THE EXECUTE SQL TASK EDITOR.

What you need to do is change the "ForceExecutionResults" property to "Success." This will fix your problem.

Secondly you need to be watchful of your MaximumErrorCount property else your system will fail out.

I hope this helps merry christmas.

|||

SELECT 0 + ISNULL((SELECT MAX( COLUMN1 ) FROM TABLE1 WHERE COLUMN2 = 'XXX'), 0)

OR

SELECT '' + ISNULL((SELECT COLUMN1 FROM TABLE1 WHERE COLUMN2 = 'XXX'), '')

doing so, you will always have a result the task can forward.

Not pretty but preferable vs. the ForceExecutionResults solution i think.

|||

It took me a while to find this thread that describes my problem. It appears that this has never been addressed as I am running SP1 and am still having the problem. I would have thought this was a fairly basic bug and would have been fixed by now. Any feedback about a permanent solution from the SSIS development team?

I also prefer the coded ISNULL workaround over setting the ForceExecutionResults property. You can also use the COALESCE function to the same effect, which I prefer for similar scenarios.

|||

highpockets wrote:

It took me a while to find this thread that describes my problem. It appears that this has never been addressed as I am running SP1 and am still having the problem. I would have thought this was a fairly basic bug and would have been fixed by now.

bug reports should be submitted here: http://connect.microsoft.com/feedback/default.aspx?SiteID=68

ExecuteSQL task fails and I think it should not

I setup my ExecuteSQL task to have a "Single Row" resultset. The query returns no rows. It fails. I don't think it should but then maybe this is consistent with the lookup transform piping rows down the error output if there is not a lookup value returned.

The error returned is

Error: 0xC002F309 at Execute SQL Task, Execute SQL Task: An error occurred while assigning a value to variable "Variable": "Single Row result set is specified, but no rows were returned.".
Thanks

Allan
Doesn't sound right to me. If you were getting the MAX of something its perfectly plausible that no results would be returned (if no records in the table).

-Jamie|||Exactly |||Hmm... interesting. Can you open this on BetaPlace, please?

thanks!
ash|||I'm working with the realease version and having the same problem. Any answer to this?
|||

The following discussion pertains to the Execute SQL Task Control flow.

THE SUGGESTIONS I MAKE ARE TO THE PROPERTIES WHICH YOU HAVE TO RIGHT CLICK AND GO TO PROPERTIES ON THE EXECUTE SQL TASK. DO NOT TRY TO CORRECT THIS PROBLEM IN THE EXECUTE SQL TASK EDITOR.

What you need to do is change the "ForceExecutionResults" property to "Success." This will fix your problem.

Secondly you need to be watchful of your MaximumErrorCount property else your system will fail out.

I hope this helps merry christmas.

|||

SELECT 0 +ISNULL((SELECT MAX( COLUMN1 ) FROM TABLE1 WHERE COLUMN2 ='XXX'), 0)

OR

SELECT '' +ISNULL((SELECT COLUMN1 FROM TABLE1 WHERE COLUMN2 ='XXX'), '')

doing so, you will always have a result the task can forward.

Not pretty but preferable vs. the ForceExecutionResults solution i think.

|||

It took me a while to find this thread that describes my problem. It appears that this has never been addressed as I am running SP1 and am still having the problem. I would have thought this was a fairly basic bug and would have been fixed by now. Any feedback about a permanent solution from the SSIS development team?

I also prefer the coded ISNULL workaround over setting the ForceExecutionResults property. You can also use the COALESCE function to the same effect, which I prefer for similar scenarios.

|||

highpockets wrote:

It took me a while to find this thread that describes my problem. It appears that this has never been addressed as I am running SP1 and am still having the problem. I would have thought this was a fairly basic bug and would have been fixed by now.

bug reports should be submitted here: http://connect.microsoft.com/feedback/default.aspx?SiteID=68sql

executeBatch()

Hi there,
when I use a PreparedStatement for a executing a batch of inserts, the
driver executes a single sp_executesql for EACH statement in the batch.
Is this a limitation of the database or of the driver?
Kein Plan berlebt die erste Feindberhrung.
Steffen Ramlow wrote:

> Hi there,
> when I use a PreparedStatement for a executing a batch of inserts, the
> driver executes a single sp_executesql for EACH statement in the batch.
> Is this a limitation of the database or of the driver?
The question is whether those sp_executesql calls are sent one-at-a-time
with a wait for a DBMS response for each one, or whether they are sent
all together in one network packet, with whatever parameter calls needed
in between. The best performance would of course be to send everything in
one packet. If it doesn't, it's because the driver implemented the syntax of
batches without reaching for the best performance.
Joe

> --
> Kein Plan berlebt die erste Feindberhrung.
>
|||Joe Weinstein wrote:

> The question is whether those sp_executesql calls are sent
> one-at-a-time with a wait for a DBMS response for each one, or
> whether they are sent
> all together in one network packet, with whatever parameter calls
> needed
> in between. The best performance would of course be to send
> everything in one packet. If it doesn't, it's because the driver
> implemented the syntax of batches without reaching for the best
> performance.
> Joe
One call per statement. Maybe this is necessary to get the results for each
statement?
Kein Plan berlebt die erste Feindberhrung.
|||Steffen Ramlow wrote:

> Joe Weinstein wrote:
>
>
> One call per statement. Maybe this is necessary to get the results for each
> statement?
>
Nope. the DBMS will send everything back in order anyway. In fact you can do your own
speedy batching that is optimal:
StringBuffer myBatch = new StringBuffer();
while (make batch)
{
myBatch.append("insert into my table values(" + myVal1 + ", " + myVal2 + ")\n"); // newline at end is important
}
stmt.executeUpdate( myBatch.toString() ); // all goes at once.

> --
> Kein Plan berlebt die erste Feindberhrung.
>
|||Joe Weinstein wrote:

> Nope. the DBMS will send everything back in order anyway. In fact you
> can do your own
> speedy batching that is optimal:
> StringBuffer myBatch = new StringBuffer();
> while (make batch)
> {
> myBatch.append("insert into my table values(" + myVal1 + ", " +
> myVal2 + ")\n"); // newline at end is important }
> stmt.executeUpdate( myBatch.toString() ); // all goes at once.
If it is so easy (and i think it is), why makes the driver a single call per
statement?
Kein Plan berlebt die erste Feindberhrung.
|||Steffen Ramlow wrote:

> Joe Weinstein wrote:
>
>
> If it is so easy (and i think it is), why makes the driver a single call per
> statement?
>
Well, it really isn't so easy all the time, because it is superior for
whole-system performance for the DBMS to get the SQL to be repeated once,
and compile it once to be re-used, rather than to has the DBMS parse it
each time every time, but you and I agree that there is no reason the driver
couldn't do the batching of the execute-sql calls and send them all at once.
That would be faster.
Joe
> --
> Kein Plan berlebt die erste Feindberhrung.
>
|||Joe Weinstein wrote:

> Well, it really isn't so easy all the time, because it is superior for
> whole-system performance for the DBMS to get the SQL to be repeated
> once, and compile it once to be re-used, rather than to has the DBMS
> parse it each time every time, but you and I agree that there is no
> reason the driver couldn't do the batching of the execute-sql calls
> and send them all at once. That would be faster.
Well - it depends. I made some tests against mssql 2000 and oracle 9.
1000 insert statements (varchar(10), varchar(50), numeric(10)), no index.
It took about 2,5 s to do this with a prepared batch and mssql 2000.
It took about 0,1 s to do this with a prepared batch and oracle.
It took about 1,1 s to do this with a single db-call, with all statements in
it and mssql 2000.
It took about 4,8 s to do this with a single db-call, with all statements in
it and oracle.
So it is very DB-dependend, how efficient the driver AND the DB can handle
this sort of task.
This specific DB-behavior should be known to the driver vendor.
Hm, the oracle-driver guys know their DB, the mssql-driver guys not!? ;)
Kein Plan berlebt die erste Feindberhrung.
|||Steffen Ramlow wrote:

> Joe Weinstein wrote:
>
>
> Well - it depends. I made some tests against mssql 2000 and oracle 9.
> 1000 insert statements (varchar(10), varchar(50), numeric(10)), no index.
> It took about 2,5 s to do this with a prepared batch and mssql 2000.
> It took about 0,1 s to do this with a prepared batch and oracle.
> It took about 1,1 s to do this with a single db-call, with all statements in
> it and mssql 2000.
> It took about 4,8 s to do this with a single db-call, with all statements in
> it and oracle.
> So it is very DB-dependend, how efficient the driver AND the DB can handle
> this sort of task.
Good test, but were you able to determine whether the oracle driver sent the real batch
execute in one packet, like we want the MS driver to do? It might be that the MS
driver/DBMS was also extremely fast is it sent all the sp_execute calls at once too,
and this also seems to show a weakness in the oracle sql parser...

> This specific DB-behavior should be known to the driver vendor.
> Hm, the oracle-driver guys know their DB, the mssql-driver guys not!? ;)
Well, the MS driver comes from a company that makes drivers for several DBMSes,
so there is probably a considerable amount of generic code and algoritms that
is being used in the MS driver.

> --
> Kein Plan berlebt die erste Feindberhrung.
>
|||Joe Weinstein wrote:

> Good test, but were you able to determine whether the oracle driver
> sent the real batch execute in one packet,
Yes, (IIRC) I could see it in the oracle trace I made.

> It might be that the MS driver/DBMS was also extremely fast is
> it sent all the sp_execute calls at once too,
No SQL Server Profiler says one call per statement.

> and this also seems to
> show a weakness in the oracle sql parser...
It seems that these guys think, everybody uses bind variables

> Well, the MS driver comes from a company that makes drivers for
> several DBMSes,
> so there is probably a considerable amount of generic code and
> algoritms that
> is being used in the MS driver.
Should I test merants oracle driver too!?
But what I did, I have tested i-net's seropto, it took 2,8 s instead of the
0,1 s with the oracle driver.
Kein Plan berlebt die erste Feindberhrung.
|||Steffen Ramlow wrote:

> Joe Weinstein wrote:
>
>
> Yes, (IIRC) I could see it in the oracle trace I made.
>
>
> No SQL Server Profiler says one call per statement.
>
>
> It seems that these guys think, everybody uses bind variables
>
>
> Should I test merants oracle driver too!?
> But what I did, I have tested i-net's seropto, it took 2,8 s instead of the
> 0,1 s with the oracle driver.
> --
> Kein Plan berlebt die erste Feindberhrung.
god luck. e live in interesting times...
Joe
>
>

Execute SQL Task - Assign the result to a variable

Hi,

Let's say that the query in my SQL Task returns a single integer number.

How can I put that single number in a variable?

Thank you.

You should read through Books On-Line for SSIS.

Here's another resource for the Execute SQL Task: http://www.sqlis.com/58.aspx

|||Thank you.

Execute Permissions on 400 SPROCs

Our developers are rolling out an app with 400 new SPROCS. All data access i
s
done through them. I need to give a single user execute permissions on all
400 SPROCS. It would be easiest to just give the user execute permsissions o
n
all stored procs and remove access from the few that don't apply.
Is there a fast way to do this?The preferred way is to create a database User Role and provide execute
permissions to the User Role. And the same applies for creating a user Role
for DENY EXECUTE.
Then as users come and go, they only have to be added to or removed from the
User Role. The 'Best Practice' is to add the something like the following to
each stored procedure script file (You do have them in source
control -right?).
GRANT EXECUTE ON {StoredProcedureName} TO {UserRole}
And if necessary,
DENY EXECUTE ON {StoredProcedureName} TO {DenyUserRole}
Then, when the files are run on any server, the permissions are correct.
There are some stored procedures for which it is probably not a good idea to
provide users EXECUTE permissions. It is much better to explicitly grant
permissions to each stored procedure rather than use 'blanket' permissions
for all objects. I would much rather know that permissions were explicit
provided than accidentally supplied due to 'sloppiness'.
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"Dan" <Dan@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:82DEA919-4FB4-4BE1-B495-3FB1722122BB@.microsoft.com...
> Our developers are rolling out an app with 400 new SPROCS. All data access
> is
> done through them. I need to give a single user execute permissions on all
> 400 SPROCS. It would be easiest to just give the user execute permsissions
> on
> all stored procs and remove access from the few that don't apply.
> Is there a fast way to do this?|||Dan
SELECT 'GRANT EXECUTE ON [' + USER_NAME(uid) + '].[' + name + '] TO
' +
'[UserNameHere]'
FROM sysobjects
WHERE
type = 'P'
AND OBJECTPROPERTY(OBJECT_ID(QUOTENAME(USER_
NAME(uid)) + '.' +
QUOTENAME(name)), 'IsMSShipped') = 0
--Run the output in QA
"Dan" <Dan@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:82DEA919-4FB4-4BE1-B495-3FB1722122BB@.microsoft.com...
> Our developers are rolling out an app with 400 new SPROCS. All data access
> is
> done through them. I need to give a single user execute permissions on all
> 400 SPROCS. It would be easiest to just give the user execute permsissions
> on
> all stored procs and remove access from the few that don't apply.
> Is there a fast way to do this?

execute multiple queries over a single connection

Hi!
Is SQL Server 2000, just a toy?
Accordind validation tests it needs 30.000 connections to move
170 rows from Linked Server.
JackWe need more information. How do you "move 170 rows from Linked Server"? Can
you show us some code?
How did you determine that 30000 connection were needed?
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Jack" <none@.INVALIDmail.com> wrote in message news:AYa%e.137$xG6.129@.read3.inet.fi...[vbcol
=seagreen]
> Hi!
> Is SQL Server 2000, just a toy?
> Accordind validation tests it needs 30.000 connections to move
> 170 rows from Linked Server.
> Jack
>[/vbcol]|||Then it is a BizTalk issue. Perhaps BizTalk isn't very intelligent in how it
interacts with SQL
Server, or BizTalk isn't used in the most efficient way? I can't tell as I d
on't know anything about
BizTalk.
I suggest you raise the issue in a BizTalk group, as they will understand wh
at you want to achieve,
and can respond to how you try to achieve that goal. :-)
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Jack" <Jack@.none.com> wrote in message news:Y3T0f.251$865.187@.read3.inet.fi...en">
> Well it is this BizTalk Orchestration
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/biztalk/
> BTW, it is PowerToys in their own words ;)
>
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com>
> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 5:51 PM
> Subject: Re: execute multiple queries over a single connection
>
>

execute multiple queries over a single connection

Hi!
Is SQL Server 2000, just a toy?
Accordind validation tests it needs 30.000 connections to move
170 rows from Linked Server.
Jack
We need more information. How do you "move 170 rows from Linked Server"? Can you show us some code?
How did you determine that 30000 connection were needed?
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Jack" <none@.INVALIDmail.com> wrote in message news:AYa%e.137$xG6.129@.read3.inet.fi...
> Hi!
> Is SQL Server 2000, just a toy?
> Accordind validation tests it needs 30.000 connections to move
> 170 rows from Linked Server.
> Jack
>
|||Then it is a BizTalk issue. Perhaps BizTalk isn't very intelligent in how it interacts with SQL
Server, or BizTalk isn't used in the most efficient way? I can't tell as I don't know anything about
BizTalk.
I suggest you raise the issue in a BizTalk group, as they will understand what you want to achieve,
and can respond to how you try to achieve that goal. :-)
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Jack" <Jack@.none.com> wrote in message news:Y3T0f.251$865.187@.read3.inet.fi...
> Well it is this BizTalk Orchestration
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/biztalk/
> BTW, it is PowerToys in their own words ;)
>
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com>
> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 5:51 PM
> Subject: Re: execute multiple queries over a single connection
>
>

execute multiple queries over a single connection

Hi!
Is SQL Server 2000, just a toy?
Accordind validation tests it needs 30.000 connections to move
170 rows from Linked Server.
JackWe need more information. How do you "move 170 rows from Linked Server"? Can you show us some code?
How did you determine that 30000 connection were needed?
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Jack" <none@.INVALIDmail.com> wrote in message news:AYa%e.137$xG6.129@.read3.inet.fi...
> Hi!
> Is SQL Server 2000, just a toy?
> Accordind validation tests it needs 30.000 connections to move
> 170 rows from Linked Server.
> Jack
>