Opening Solution clears previous queries in SSMS

Yikes!
Does anyone know of a way that I can open a solution but keep my current
query windows open? Every time I go to File -> Open -> Project/Solution, it
kills any query windows I was working in.
And while I'm here, is there a way to set SSMS to open with Solution the way
you can have it open a query window when you connect?
Help is appreciated. Thanks,
Catadmin
--
MCDBA, MCSA
Random Thoughts: If a person is Microsoft Certified, does that mean that
Microsoft pays the bills for the funny white jackets that tie in the back?
@.=)Catadmin wrote:
> Yikes!
> Does anyone know of a way that I can open a solution but keep my current
> query windows open? Every time I go to File -> Open -> Project/Solution,
it
> kills any query windows I was working in.
> And while I'm here, is there a way to set SSMS to open with Solution the w
ay
> you can have it open a query window when you connect?
> Help is appreciated. Thanks,
> Catadmin
Launch another instance of SSMS?
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Yeah, but I'd kinda like to open up the solution in my current instance of
SSMS.
I have a solution where I keep my commonly used code templates to fix data.
During the course of a day, I might be working on new development when
suddenly I get help desk tickets asking for data fixes because someone broke
something. Rather than lose what I've got open, or have to save & reopen it
,
or have to go to the whole Start->Programs hoo-ha (which is a pain when a
running query keeps pulls the focus back to SSMS while I'm trying to get to
something on the Start->Programs path), I'd like to just be able to open my
solution in Solution Explorer and have everything else remain the same.
Plus, if I open up another instance, I have to do cut-n-paste from one
instance to another. Bleargh. There's got to be a better way.
MCDBA, MCSA
Random Thoughts: If a person is Microsoft Certified, does that mean that
Microsoft pays the bills for the funny white jackets that tie in the back?
@.=)
"Tracy McKibben" wrote:

> Catadmin wrote:
> Launch another instance of SSMS?
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com
>|||Another option is to just keep those scripts in a particular
directory. Then you can create a menu item in SSMS that will
open that particular directory. That's about what I've done
at some places for the same reasons - to get quick access to
fire fighting scripts and not lose whatever else I have
open. Just go to Tools, External Tools and create a new
entry - Command Explorer and Argument of the script
directory. That might work for you.
-Sue
On Thu, 7 Sep 2006 08:19:02 -0700, Catadmin
<goldpetalgraphics@.yahoo.com> wrote:

>Yeah, but I'd kinda like to open up the solution in my current instance of
>SSMS.
>I have a solution where I keep my commonly used code templates to fix data.
> During the course of a day, I might be working on new development when
>suddenly I get help desk tickets asking for data fixes because someone brok
e
>something. Rather than lose what I've got open, or have to save & reopen i
t,
>or have to go to the whole Start->Programs hoo-ha (which is a pain when a
>running query keeps pulls the focus back to SSMS while I'm trying to get to
>something on the Start->Programs path), I'd like to just be able to open my
>solution in Solution Explorer and have everything else remain the same.
>Plus, if I open up another instance, I have to do cut-n-paste from one
>instance to another. Bleargh. There's got to be a better way.|||Sue,
I see what you're talking about with the Tools -> External Tools, but I'm
not clear on what you mean by Command Explorer. Is there a particular .exe
that you're refering to with this?
Thanks,
Catadmin
"Sue Hoegemeier" wrote:

> Another option is to just keep those scripts in a particular
> directory. Then you can create a menu item in SSMS that will
> open that particular directory. That's about what I've done
> at some places for the same reasons - to get quick access to
> fire fighting scripts and not lose whatever else I have
> open. Just go to Tools, External Tools and create a new
> entry - Command Explorer and Argument of the script
> directory. That might work for you.
> -Sue
> On Thu, 7 Sep 2006 08:19:02 -0700, Catadmin
> <goldpetalgraphics@.yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>|||Sorry about that - it's not real clear from what I typed.
The exe is Explorer. For the Command, you reference:
%SystemRoot%\explorer.exe
so that it fires off Windows Explorer. It will start in
whatever directory you list for the Arguments.
-Sue
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 04:36:02 -0700, Catadmin
<goldpetalgraphics@.yahoo.com> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>Sue,
>I see what you're talking about with the Tools -> External Tools, but I'm
>not clear on what you mean by Command Explorer. Is there a particular .exe
>that you're refering to with this?
>Thanks,
>Catadmin
>"Sue Hoegemeier" wrote:
>|||Thank you, Sue, but that's still not quite what I want. This doesn't enable
me to open an entire solution in SSMS while keeping current query windows
open.
If anyone from MS is reading this post, I'm sure there are other people who
would like to do the same thing I want to do (hint, hint).
Catadmin
--
MCDBA, MCSA
Random Thoughts: If a person is Microsoft Certified, does that mean that
Microsoft pays the bills for the funny white jackets that tie in the back?
@.=)
"Sue Hoegemeier" wrote:

> Sorry about that - it's not real clear from what I typed.
> The exe is Explorer. For the Command, you reference:
> %SystemRoot%\explorer.exe
> so that it fires off Windows Explorer. It will start in
> whatever directory you list for the Arguments.
> -Sue
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 04:36:02 -0700, Catadmin
> <goldpetalgraphics@.yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>|||No it won't open a solution. Like I said it will allow you
to open scripts in a specific directory but not a solution.
I think it's the only way around not losing what queries you
already have open if you don't want to open another SSMS
session. You could always search the product feedback site
to see if others posted this or post the request yourself:
http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/productfeedback/
-Sue
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 03:51:01 -0700, Catadmin
<goldpetalgraphics@.yahoo.com> wrote:

>Thank you, Sue, but that's still not quite what I want. This doesn't enabl
e
>me to open an entire solution in SSMS while keeping current query windows
>open.
>If anyone from MS is reading this post, I'm sure there are other people who
>would like to do the same thing I want to do (hint, hint).
>Catadmin

Opening Solution clears previous queries in SSMS

Yikes!
Does anyone know of a way that I can open a solution but keep my current
query windows open? Every time I go to File -> Open -> Project/Solution, it
kills any query windows I was working in.
And while I'm here, is there a way to set SSMS to open with Solution the way
you can have it open a query window when you connect?
Help is appreciated. Thanks,
Catadmin
--
MCDBA, MCSA
Random Thoughts: If a person is Microsoft Certified, does that mean that
Microsoft pays the bills for the funny white jackets that tie in the back?
@.=)Catadmin wrote:
> Yikes!
> Does anyone know of a way that I can open a solution but keep my current
> query windows open? Every time I go to File -> Open -> Project/Solution, it
> kills any query windows I was working in.
> And while I'm here, is there a way to set SSMS to open with Solution the way
> you can have it open a query window when you connect?
> Help is appreciated. Thanks,
> Catadmin
Launch another instance of SSMS?
--
Tracy McKibben
MCDBA
http://www.realsqlguy.com|||Yeah, but I'd kinda like to open up the solution in my current instance of
SSMS.
I have a solution where I keep my commonly used code templates to fix data.
During the course of a day, I might be working on new development when
suddenly I get help desk tickets asking for data fixes because someone broke
something. Rather than lose what I've got open, or have to save & reopen it,
or have to go to the whole Start->Programs hoo-ha (which is a pain when a
running query keeps pulls the focus back to SSMS while I'm trying to get to
something on the Start->Programs path), I'd like to just be able to open my
solution in Solution Explorer and have everything else remain the same.
Plus, if I open up another instance, I have to do cut-n-paste from one
instance to another. Bleargh. There's got to be a better way.
MCDBA, MCSA
Random Thoughts: If a person is Microsoft Certified, does that mean that
Microsoft pays the bills for the funny white jackets that tie in the back?
@.=)
"Tracy McKibben" wrote:
> Catadmin wrote:
> > Yikes!
> >
> > Does anyone know of a way that I can open a solution but keep my current
> > query windows open? Every time I go to File -> Open -> Project/Solution, it
> > kills any query windows I was working in.
> >
> > And while I'm here, is there a way to set SSMS to open with Solution the way
> > you can have it open a query window when you connect?
> >
> > Help is appreciated. Thanks,
> >
> > Catadmin
> Launch another instance of SSMS?
> --
> Tracy McKibben
> MCDBA
> http://www.realsqlguy.com
>|||Another option is to just keep those scripts in a particular
directory. Then you can create a menu item in SSMS that will
open that particular directory. That's about what I've done
at some places for the same reasons - to get quick access to
fire fighting scripts and not lose whatever else I have
open. Just go to Tools, External Tools and create a new
entry - Command Explorer and Argument of the script
directory. That might work for you.
-Sue
On Thu, 7 Sep 2006 08:19:02 -0700, Catadmin
<goldpetalgraphics@.yahoo.com> wrote:
>Yeah, but I'd kinda like to open up the solution in my current instance of
>SSMS.
>I have a solution where I keep my commonly used code templates to fix data.
> During the course of a day, I might be working on new development when
>suddenly I get help desk tickets asking for data fixes because someone broke
>something. Rather than lose what I've got open, or have to save & reopen it,
>or have to go to the whole Start->Programs hoo-ha (which is a pain when a
>running query keeps pulls the focus back to SSMS while I'm trying to get to
>something on the Start->Programs path), I'd like to just be able to open my
>solution in Solution Explorer and have everything else remain the same.
>Plus, if I open up another instance, I have to do cut-n-paste from one
>instance to another. Bleargh. There's got to be a better way.|||Sue,
I see what you're talking about with the Tools -> External Tools, but I'm
not clear on what you mean by Command Explorer. Is there a particular .exe
that you're refering to with this?
Thanks,
Catadmin
"Sue Hoegemeier" wrote:
> Another option is to just keep those scripts in a particular
> directory. Then you can create a menu item in SSMS that will
> open that particular directory. That's about what I've done
> at some places for the same reasons - to get quick access to
> fire fighting scripts and not lose whatever else I have
> open. Just go to Tools, External Tools and create a new
> entry - Command Explorer and Argument of the script
> directory. That might work for you.
> -Sue
> On Thu, 7 Sep 2006 08:19:02 -0700, Catadmin
> <goldpetalgraphics@.yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Yeah, but I'd kinda like to open up the solution in my current instance of
> >SSMS.
> >
> >I have a solution where I keep my commonly used code templates to fix data.
> > During the course of a day, I might be working on new development when
> >suddenly I get help desk tickets asking for data fixes because someone broke
> >something. Rather than lose what I've got open, or have to save & reopen it,
> >or have to go to the whole Start->Programs hoo-ha (which is a pain when a
> >running query keeps pulls the focus back to SSMS while I'm trying to get to
> >something on the Start->Programs path), I'd like to just be able to open my
> >solution in Solution Explorer and have everything else remain the same.
> >
> >Plus, if I open up another instance, I have to do cut-n-paste from one
> >instance to another. Bleargh. There's got to be a better way.
>|||Sorry about that - it's not real clear from what I typed.
The exe is Explorer. For the Command, you reference:
%SystemRoot%\explorer.exe
so that it fires off Windows Explorer. It will start in
whatever directory you list for the Arguments.
-Sue
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 04:36:02 -0700, Catadmin
<goldpetalgraphics@.yahoo.com> wrote:
>Sue,
>I see what you're talking about with the Tools -> External Tools, but I'm
>not clear on what you mean by Command Explorer. Is there a particular .exe
>that you're refering to with this?
>Thanks,
>Catadmin
>"Sue Hoegemeier" wrote:
>> Another option is to just keep those scripts in a particular
>> directory. Then you can create a menu item in SSMS that will
>> open that particular directory. That's about what I've done
>> at some places for the same reasons - to get quick access to
>> fire fighting scripts and not lose whatever else I have
>> open. Just go to Tools, External Tools and create a new
>> entry - Command Explorer and Argument of the script
>> directory. That might work for you.
>> -Sue
>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2006 08:19:02 -0700, Catadmin
>> <goldpetalgraphics@.yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >Yeah, but I'd kinda like to open up the solution in my current instance of
>> >SSMS.
>> >
>> >I have a solution where I keep my commonly used code templates to fix data.
>> > During the course of a day, I might be working on new development when
>> >suddenly I get help desk tickets asking for data fixes because someone broke
>> >something. Rather than lose what I've got open, or have to save & reopen it,
>> >or have to go to the whole Start->Programs hoo-ha (which is a pain when a
>> >running query keeps pulls the focus back to SSMS while I'm trying to get to
>> >something on the Start->Programs path), I'd like to just be able to open my
>> >solution in Solution Explorer and have everything else remain the same.
>> >
>> >Plus, if I open up another instance, I have to do cut-n-paste from one
>> >instance to another. Bleargh. There's got to be a better way.
>>|||Thank you, Sue, but that's still not quite what I want. This doesn't enable
me to open an entire solution in SSMS while keeping current query windows
open.
If anyone from MS is reading this post, I'm sure there are other people who
would like to do the same thing I want to do (hint, hint).
Catadmin
--
MCDBA, MCSA
Random Thoughts: If a person is Microsoft Certified, does that mean that
Microsoft pays the bills for the funny white jackets that tie in the back?
@.=)
"Sue Hoegemeier" wrote:
> Sorry about that - it's not real clear from what I typed.
> The exe is Explorer. For the Command, you reference:
> %SystemRoot%\explorer.exe
> so that it fires off Windows Explorer. It will start in
> whatever directory you list for the Arguments.
> -Sue
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 04:36:02 -0700, Catadmin
> <goldpetalgraphics@.yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Sue,
> >
> >I see what you're talking about with the Tools -> External Tools, but I'm
> >not clear on what you mean by Command Explorer. Is there a particular .exe
> >that you're refering to with this?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >Catadmin
> >
> >"Sue Hoegemeier" wrote:
> >
> >> Another option is to just keep those scripts in a particular
> >> directory. Then you can create a menu item in SSMS that will
> >> open that particular directory. That's about what I've done
> >> at some places for the same reasons - to get quick access to
> >> fire fighting scripts and not lose whatever else I have
> >> open. Just go to Tools, External Tools and create a new
> >> entry - Command Explorer and Argument of the script
> >> directory. That might work for you.
> >>
> >> -Sue
> >>
> >> On Thu, 7 Sep 2006 08:19:02 -0700, Catadmin
> >> <goldpetalgraphics@.yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Yeah, but I'd kinda like to open up the solution in my current instance of
> >> >SSMS.
> >> >
> >> >I have a solution where I keep my commonly used code templates to fix data.
> >> > During the course of a day, I might be working on new development when
> >> >suddenly I get help desk tickets asking for data fixes because someone broke
> >> >something. Rather than lose what I've got open, or have to save & reopen it,
> >> >or have to go to the whole Start->Programs hoo-ha (which is a pain when a
> >> >running query keeps pulls the focus back to SSMS while I'm trying to get to
> >> >something on the Start->Programs path), I'd like to just be able to open my
> >> >solution in Solution Explorer and have everything else remain the same.
> >> >
> >> >Plus, if I open up another instance, I have to do cut-n-paste from one
> >> >instance to another. Bleargh. There's got to be a better way.
> >>
> >>
>|||No it won't open a solution. Like I said it will allow you
to open scripts in a specific directory but not a solution.
I think it's the only way around not losing what queries you
already have open if you don't want to open another SSMS
session. You could always search the product feedback site
to see if others posted this or post the request yourself:
http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/productfeedback/
-Sue
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 03:51:01 -0700, Catadmin
<goldpetalgraphics@.yahoo.com> wrote:
>Thank you, Sue, but that's still not quite what I want. This doesn't enable
>me to open an entire solution in SSMS while keeping current query windows
>open.
>If anyone from MS is reading this post, I'm sure there are other people who
>would like to do the same thing I want to do (hint, hint).
>Catadmin

OPEN XML vs. SQLXMLBulkLoad

Which approach is a faster, better solution to process XML data? I get XML
data from an external web service. To ballpark the general size, an average
data file would be approximately 64K when saved in UTF-8.
A) TEXT parameter/sp_xml_preparedocument/OPENXML
- Passing raw XML as a TEXT parameter into a stored procedure
- sp_xml_preparedocument to parse the XML into an XML handle.
- Process the data using T-SQL with OPENXML
B) SQLXMLBULKLOAD/staging table/stored procedure
- Save the XML to a flat file
- Use the COM object SQLXMLBULKLOAD to bulk load the XML into a staging
table.
- Call a stored procedure which processes the data in the staging table
using T-SQL.
Any insight into this would be greatly appreciated.I prefer option B. This allows me to bulkload (i.e. minimal log) and then
use tsql to do whatever data insert in set. Also, this allows me to hand of
some of the workload to the client (i.e. workstation that does xmlbulkload).
-oj
"AsaMonsey" <AsaMonsey@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A44A0EB0-2C15-4477-8FD3-93C7379CF9E0@.microsoft.com...
> Which approach is a faster, better solution to process XML data? I get XML
> data from an external web service. To ballpark the general size, an
> average
> data file would be approximately 64K when saved in UTF-8.
> A) TEXT parameter/sp_xml_preparedocument/OPENXML
> - Passing raw XML as a TEXT parameter into a stored procedure
> - sp_xml_preparedocument to parse the XML into an XML handle.
> - Process the data using T-SQL with OPENXML
> B) SQLXMLBULKLOAD/staging table/stored procedure
> - Save the XML to a flat file
> - Use the COM object SQLXMLBULKLOAD to bulk load the XML into a staging
> table.
> - Call a stored procedure which processes the data in the staging table
> using T-SQL.
>
> Any insight into this would be greatly appreciated.|||Thanks oj,
Our performance benchmarking across 1000 files indicates that the bulk load
is about 60% faster.
I was wondering if someone could explain the technical reasons why option B
is faster.
"oj" wrote:

> I prefer option B. This allows me to bulkload (i.e. minimal log) and then
> use tsql to do whatever data insert in set. Also, this allows me to hand o
f
> some of the workload to the client (i.e. workstation that does xmlbulkload
).
> --
> -oj
>
> "AsaMonsey" <AsaMonsey@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:A44A0EB0-2C15-4477-8FD3-93C7379CF9E0@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||This article should help explain some:
[url]http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/dnsql90/html/exchsqlxml.asp?frame=true[/ur
l]
<quote>
SQLXML Bulkload enables the loading of input XML into the relational
backend. Internally, it uses the SQL Server bcp process, and is the best
mechanism to efficiently upload large input XML into the server. It is
implemented as a COM object, and it uses SQLOLEDB providers.
</quote>
-oj
"AsaMonsey" <AsaMonsey@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F989E8E7-9B24-482F-AC85-7D848D028D08@.microsoft.com...
> Thanks oj,
> Our performance benchmarking across 1000 files indicates that the bulk
> load
> is about 60% faster.
> I was wondering if someone could explain the technical reasons why option
> B
> is faster.
> "oj" wrote:
>

OO Database Design performance question

I am hoping someone has had a similar table design scenario and has a slick solution that i am not thinking of.

Basically I have the following tables (kind of OO based design in this case).

Create Table Entity (EntityID int, EntityTypeID)

Create Table Company (EntityID, CompanyName)

Create Table Contact (EntityID, FirstName, LastName)

Create Table Group (EntityID, GroupName)

Basically an Entity can be a Company, a Contact or a Group based on the EntityTypeID

The trick becomes when I get an EntityID is how to get the name of the Entity in an efficient manner.

You can make a view that does a Union to all three tables like such...

select CompanyName as Name from Company

union all

Select FirstName + LastName as Name from Contact

union all

Select GroupName as Name from Group

Perfomance wise this stinks. I have also tried a left join to all the tables and that performs better, but still not great when you are joining a bunch of records (such as Orders back to get the name of the Entity on the order).

I was thinking of an indexed view but it doesn't let you do a left join or a union. A trigger also comes to mind but I have other triggers on those tables and I really don't want to create any more. I could also add all the different name columns to the entity table but then I end up with a bunch of null values.

Any creative ideas on how to create a function, view, indexed view, etc that will make this efficient?

Thanks!

OO designs often fail to translate well to a high-performance transactional database. Subtypes are especially troublesome in this regard.

The problem here is one of abstraction. The more you abstract something, the more it becomes difficult to query in a practical way. Some package software takes this to the extreme with the concept of the "thing" table. works great on the whiteboard but kills performance as tables get large.

A function is probably going to be your best option. Write a T-SQL function that chooses the table for the lookup based on the type column. You can either pass in the type as a parameter or look it up in the function.

something like:

if @.type = 1 then
select @.retval = companyname from Company

if @.type = 2
select @.retval = firstname+lastname from Contact

if @.type = 3
select @.retval = groupname from group

|||

The key here is that if you are going to use subtypes, (and I am a big fan) you must keep everything that is common between them in the same table, otherwise you are just asking for trouble. The problem here is that you have to be careful with subtypes not to overdo them, and in ths case I think you may have done that. In SQL, if you are going to do a subtype, the supertype really needs be compellingly similar and have a similar purpose.

For example, a vehicle type might be proper for an auto shop, because all vehicles are tracked the same, then each subtype has some differences. Or you might have a patient supertype (records, names bills, etc) and then subtypes for male patients and female ones.

In your case, the subtypes have nothing to do with one another so there is no point and all you are doing is forcing this OO design into a database. You could fix your performance problems by adding a Name column to the Entity table and update it using a trigger on each of the supertypes, but unless there really is some compelling similarities that merit a supertype, you should rethink your design.

|||Take a look at the AdventureWorks sample database. IMHO, it has a very good normalized representaion of Contacts/People/Customers, etc.|||I agree that a function will work however when it comes to searching based on name the function is going to scan which obviously wouldn't be good.|||

i see your point however I argue that it does need an OO design. For example a Customer that orders can be a contact or a company. This really is only an issue when dealing with searching. A contact for name has a Salutation, FirstName, LastName, MiddleName, Suffix while a company might have CompanyName and DBAName. Both are customers however their "name" structure is entirely different. Would you then put all of those fields on the Entity table and leave some null depending on the EntityTypeID? I can see going with a Name1 and Name2 column on the Entity table and those fields have different meanings based on the EntityTypeID. Thoughts?

|||

It is not really an OO design, it is a common database thing. In your case, if you do mean a customer, which can be a person or a company, then yes, this is a valid thing to do. However, I am not so sure I wouldn't make the user choose the subtype before doing a search, since it is pretty unlikely that they wouldn't know if they were looking for one or the other.

I might also do the search in each table seperate from one another, perhaps in different connections from your UI. Either way I would certainly not create generic columns for names, as that would make the design harder to use, and I wouldn't put the names in the customer table with nulls where values don't quite work because then the searching issues are exactly the same (perhaps worse) than with two tables.

Otherwise, like I said before, I would add a name column to the customer table that was managed by a trigger on the child tables. So I would populate the customer.name column with person.firstName + ' ' + person.lastName (or something like it) for persons, and company.name for the companies, if you really need to search both in a single statement.

|||

Stark77 wrote:

I agree that a function will work however when it comes to searching based on name the function is going to scan which obviously wouldn't be good.

I don't think SQL Server has function-based indexes like Oracle, however you might be able to create an indexed view that includes the function as a column.

if you schemabind your function and your view (the view will have to be pretty simple) then this may allow you to create an indexed view, which is similar to a materialized view in Oracle, and that may help your performance.

worth a try if you haven't thought of this option.

Another option would be to use a trigger to denormalize the correct name into the parent table.

Online Connection between Access and SQL Server

Hello,
I am trying to develop a database solution for an organisation in
Indonesia.

This organization has a number of offices and users throughout the
country. They all need to maintain their own data, but I also need to
create a central database, to store all of the data, and share data
between the individual users. The problem is that the internet
connections are not reliable, so a online solution isn't possible. I
am planning to implement stand alone databases in Access, which "sync"
with the central server. This sync could happen automatically (maybe
daily), or could be initiated by the user. This Sync would/could take
place when the internet connection is working.

I am very familiar with Access, but I suspect that I will need to use
SQL Server for the central database. I have not used SQL Server
before, and have a few questions:

Is it possible to host a SQL Server, so that it is "Online"? What do I
need to do for this? Does this need to be hosted by an ISP, or could
it been hosted on a computer in our office? What are the security
considerations?
Is it then possible to connect to this SQL Server from the Access
databases in the various locations to "Sync" the data? If I could run
SQL statements from the stand alone databases which could access the
online SQL Server I could write the code for the Sync procedure. The
bit that I am unsure of is how to connect to the SQL Server?

Could anyone point me in the right direction? Examples? References?
What sort of technology to use?
I know VB and how to write SQL statements, it's just the connectivity
that I am unsure of.

Thanks in advance.

Cheers

Michael"Michael" <michael.howden@.gmail.comwrote in
news:1174631759.545107.227660@.o5g2000hsb.googlegro ups.com:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Hello,
I am trying to develop a database solution for an organisation in
Indonesia.
>
This organization has a number of offices and users throughout the
country. They all need to maintain their own data, but I also need to
create a central database, to store all of the data, and share data
between the individual users. The problem is that the internet
connections are not reliable, so a online solution isn't possible. I
am planning to implement stand alone databases in Access, which "sync"
with the central server. This sync could happen automatically (maybe
daily), or could be initiated by the user. This Sync would/could take
place when the internet connection is working.
>
I am very familiar with Access, but I suspect that I will need to use
SQL Server for the central database. I have not used SQL Server
before, and have a few questions:
>
Is it possible to host a SQL Server, so that it is "Online"? What do I
need to do for this? Does this need to be hosted by an ISP, or could
it been hosted on a computer in our office? What are the security
considerations?
Is it then possible to connect to this SQL Server from the Access
databases in the various locations to "Sync" the data? If I could run
SQL statements from the stand alone databases which could access the
online SQL Server I could write the code for the Sync procedure. The
bit that I am unsure of is how to connect to the SQL Server?
>
Could anyone point me in the right direction? Examples? References?
What sort of technology to use?
I know VB and how to write SQL statements, it's just the connectivity
that I am unsure of.
>
Thanks in advance.
>
Cheers
>
Michael

Yes.

There are many providers of internet available MS-SQL databases for as
little as 10 USD / month. They provide server maintenance and do daily
backups. They are up 99.44% of the time which is far more than the server
of any organization with which I have worked. I have been very happy with
DiscountAsp.Net, after being less than happy with Interland. (3 times the
service, one third the cost). One can connect to them with a simple cable
or dsl internet connection and do the table, sproc creation etc with any
number of utilities, including Access. Many are free. I use Microsoft SQL
Server Management Studio Express (free). Its interface is much superior
to Access's.

One can then connect and "sync" through Access and (ODBC or ADO). Of
course there are other technologies for doing so; some are feee. If one
is not going to use Access as a User Interface for editing, reporting etc
then it may be entirely wasteful to load in this inefficient collection
of archaic procedures and convoluted code.

MVPs and others here have argued that such internet-enabled databases are
insecure. I have been using them for many years. I have never had a
problem with security. In the autumn I created a new database at
DiscountAsp and challenged the insecurephobiacs to break in and do a
simple task, viz, create a simple table named with their name, eg,
"Albert" or "David". No one has done so yet.

Typically these providers use very sophiticated security software as
below:

""TippingPoint Intrusion Prevention Systems
The TippingPoint Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) delivers the most
powerful network protection in the world. The TippingPoint IPS is an
in-line device that is inserted seamlessly and transparently into the
network. As packets pass through the IPS, they are fully inspected to
determine whether they are legitimate or malicious. This instantaneous
form of protection is the most effective means of preventing attacks
from ever reaching their targets.

TippingPoint's Intrusion Prevention Systems provide Application
Protection, Performance Protection and Infrastructure Protection at
gigabit speeds through total packet inspection. Application Protection
capabilities provide fast, accurate, reliable protection from internal
and external cyber attacks. Through its Infrastructure Protection
capabilities, the TippingPoint IPS protects VoIP infrastructure,
routers, switches, DNS and other critical infrastructure from targeted
attacks and traffic anomalies. TippingPoint's Performance Protection
capabilities enable customers to throttle non-mission critical
applications that hijack valuable bandwidth and IT resources, thereby
aligning network resources and business-critical application
performance.

The system is built upon TippingPoint's Threat Suppression Engine (TSE)
- a highly specialized hardware-based intrusion prevention platform
consisting of state-of-the-art network processor technology and
TippingPoint's own set of custom ASICs. The TippingPoint ASIC-based
Threat Suppression Engine is the underlying technology that has
revolutionized network protection. Through a combination of pipelined
and massively parallel processing hardware, the TSE is able to perform
thousands of checks on each packet flow simultaneously. The TSE
architecture utilizes custom ASICs, a 20 Gbps backplane and
high-performance network processors to perform total packet flow
inspection at Layers 2-7. Parallel processing ensures that packet flows
continue to move through the IPS with a latency of less than 215
microseconds, independent of the number of filters that are applied.

The TippingPoint TSE architecture also enables traffic classification
and rate shaping. Sophisticated algorithms baseline "normal" traffic
allowing for automatic thresholds and throttling so that mission
critical applications are given a higher priority on the network.

The TippingPoint IPS family offers a range of products that differ in
capacity and the number of simultaneous segments they protect.

TippingPoint X505
TippingPoint 50
TippingPoint 200
TippingPoint 200E
TippingPoint 400
TippingPoint 1200E
TippingPoint 2400E
TippingPoint 5000E
TippingPoint SMS (Enterprise-Level Management System)
TippingPoint ZPHA (Zero Power High Availability)
An integral part of the TippingPoint solution is the Digital Vaccine
Service that delivers new filters on a weekly or even daily basis to
maintain evergreen protection for the latest vulnerabilities, exploits,
viruses and rogue applications."

--
lyle fairfield

Ceterum censeo Redmond esse delendam.