Broken link to chart

Hi,

I have made a chart that displays data for my company. However, when I have the report.rdl on the "live" serverand use the "live" data source, I can't get the report manager to display the chart, only the famuos x of a broken image link. If I place the report.rdl on the test server and use the "live" data source the chart is displayed.

What is the difference between having the report on the test server versus the "live" server?

Report manager -> report on test server -> live data source = working

Report manager -> report on "live" server -> live data source = no image

I dont think the problem is sequrity related, but I dont know for sure...

Thanks in advance!

Niklas

I am able to display data in text, but not images, like the chart...

Any thoughts?

|||

I mean, what is the difference between showing data in an image and data in text?

Please, need help

|||

Wow, I found out how to solve this problem and if might say so...Damn I'm good.

Open the folder "...\Reporting Services\ReportServer" and find the file called "RSReportServer" (it is a Web Configuration File).

In this file you need to find the line called: "

<Extension Name="HTML4.0" Type="Microsoft.ReportingServices.Rendering.HtmlRenderer.Html40RenderingExtension,Microsoft.ReportingServices.HtmlRendering" Visible="false"/>

Change Visible to true and the chart image is displayed, or if that doesent work, try changing something else in that file.

It's great to see that the support really works here =)

Thank you Niklas.

Ah, you're welcome!

Breaking Point

Hi,
We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
Thanks,
Ian
Philippines
It will not be good practice to place huge pictures in BLOBs in sql server.if
possible you can arrange an file or image server and mapp them to application.
"Ian" wrote:

> Hi,
> We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
> 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
> any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
> will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
> consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> Thanks,
> Ian
> Philippines
>
|||Thanks,
Do you know of any breaking points with SQL Server 2005 and WIndows Server
2003?
Ian
"Khwaja Arshaduddin" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> It will not be good practice to place huge pictures in BLOBs in sql server.if
> possible you can arrange an file or image server and mapp them to application.
>
> "Ian" wrote:
|||Why is it not good practive to place pics in BLOBs?
Thanks again,
Ian
"Khwaja Arshaduddin" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> It will not be good practice to place huge pictures in BLOBs in sql server.if
> possible you can arrange an file or image server and mapp them to application.
>
> "Ian" wrote:
|||As i posted earlier LARGE image file should not be loaded that is becuase
BLOBs store picture as text datatype u can find datatype in BOL .there will
be a severe impact on performance of database
"Ian" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Why is it not good practive to place pics in BLOBs?
> Thanks again,
> Ian
> "Khwaja Arshaduddin" wrote:
|||> As i posted earlier LARGE image file should not be loaded that is becuase
> BLOBs store picture as text datatype u can find datatype in BOL .there
> will
> be a severe impact on performance of database
No , SQL Server stores it in BINARY format
"Khwaja Arshaduddin" <KhwajaArshaduddin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:380520D9-7BEF-4CFF-82F8-486304BA5B38@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> As i posted earlier LARGE image file should not be loaded that is becuase
> BLOBs store picture as text datatype u can find datatype in BOL .there
> will
> be a severe impact on performance of database
> "Ian" wrote:
|||Hi
You may want to read
http://databases.aspfaq.com/database/should-i-store-images-in-the-database-or-the-filesystem.html
As far as breaking point this is will be significntly dependent on the
hardware and application, therefore running your own performance/stress tests
is about the only way you are really going to have some idea of what the
system is capable of. Products such as LoadRunner, Rational Performance
Tester, Visual Studio Team Edition for Software Testers
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/teamsystem/aa718823.aspx or Visual Studio
Team Suite can all help you performance test your web application(s).
John
"Ian" wrote:

> Hi,
> We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
> 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
> any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
> will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
> consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> Thanks,
> Ian
> Philippines
>
|||yes uri is correct it is binary... thanks uri
"Uri Dimant" wrote:

> No , SQL Server stores it in BINARY format
>
>
> "Khwaja Arshaduddin" <KhwajaArshaduddin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:380520D9-7BEF-4CFF-82F8-486304BA5B38@.microsoft.com...
>
>
|||At my last job, we used the database to store tif images. The tifs were
images of mandates which had bank details on so it made sense to store them
in the database as opposed to the filesystem. We took steps to try and ensure
the best performance, such as putting the blob column into a seperate
filegroup which we put onto a seperate raid array to the main database. The
mandates were scanned in as tifs, inserted into the db, and were viewable
from an asp front end, and tbh the solution worked well.
From a performance pov it'll be down to the quality of product, and the spec
of the machine.. ..a decent storage solution for this is a must.. ..also
spend some time on capacity planning, you'll find the db will grow quickly so
spend some time setting it up properly from the start...
"Ian" wrote:

> Hi,
> We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
> 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
> any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
> will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
> consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> Thanks,
> Ian
> Philippines
>
|||Ian:
You'll love my response. It's the same as pretty much all of my other
responses:
"It depends".
Do you need to store your images transactionally? That is, it
critically important that your images are there when the database SAYS
they're there? If so, put 'em in the database.
Do you need to read the files from something like a Web server which
serves up a lot of other static content? If so, lean towards the
filesystem.
How big are these files? "Huge" means something very different these
days vs. 5 years ago. What are your size projections? A couple of
gigs? No problem, either way. A couple of terabytes? Do you want to
minimize the load on the database when retrieving images? How many
users are you going to support? These are all considerations.
Note that you'll have to be much more careful about how you size your
database files with the images inside the DB. I'd (sometimes, it
depends) recommend putting the tables storing the images in a different
filegroup...
Also note that in SQL Server 2005, you should use VARBINARY(MAX) instead
of IMAGE. IMAGE and TEXT datatypes are deprecated as of the new version.
-Dave
Ian wrote:
> Hi,
> We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
> 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
> any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
> will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
> consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> Thanks,
> Ian
> Philippines
>
-Dave Markle
http://www.markleconsulting.com/blog

Breaking Point

Hi,
We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
Thanks,
Ian
PhilippinesIt will not be good practice to place huge pictures in BLOBs in sql server.i
f
possible you can arrange an file or image server and mapp them to applicatio
n.
"Ian" wrote:

> Hi,
> We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
> 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
> any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
> will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
> consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> Thanks,
> Ian
> Philippines
>|||If you can, place pictures in filesystem and links to them in database.
MC
"Ian" <Ian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DC7B1026-6DB6-493A-9B99-8CF719840007@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
> 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
> any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
> will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
> consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> Thanks,
> Ian
> Philippines
>|||Thanks,
Do you know of any breaking points with SQL Server 2005 and WIndows Server
2003?
Ian
"Khwaja Arshaduddin" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> It will not be good practice to place huge pictures in BLOBs in sql server
.if
> possible you can arrange an file or image server and mapp them to applicat
ion.
>
> "Ian" wrote:
>|||Why is it not good practive to place pics in BLOBs?
Thanks again,
Ian
"Khwaja Arshaduddin" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> It will not be good practice to place huge pictures in BLOBs in sql server
.if
> possible you can arrange an file or image server and mapp them to applicat
ion.
>
> "Ian" wrote:
>|||As i posted earlier LARGE image file should not be loaded that is becuase
BLOBs store picture as text datatype u can find datatype in BOL .there will
be a severe impact on performance of database
"Ian" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Why is it not good practive to place pics in BLOBs?
> Thanks again,
> Ian
> "Khwaja Arshaduddin" wrote:
>|||> As i posted earlier LARGE image file should not be loaded that is becuase
> BLOBs store picture as text datatype u can find datatype in BOL .there
> will
> be a severe impact on performance of database
No , SQL Server stores it in BINARY format
"Khwaja Arshaduddin" <KhwajaArshaduddin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:380520D9-7BEF-4CFF-82F8-486304BA5B38@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> As i posted earlier LARGE image file should not be loaded that is becuase
> BLOBs store picture as text datatype u can find datatype in BOL .there
> will
> be a severe impact on performance of database
> "Ian" wrote:
>|||Hi
You may want to read
http://databases.aspfaq.com/databas...filesystem.html
As far as breaking point this is will be significntly dependent on the
hardware and application, therefore running your own performance/stress test
s
is about the only way you are really going to have some idea of what the
system is capable of. Products such as LoadRunner, Rational Performance
Tester, Visual Studio Team Edition for Software Testers
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/te...m/aa718823.aspx or Visual Studio
Team Suite can all help you performance test your web application(s).
John
"Ian" wrote:

> Hi,
> We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
> 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
> any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
> will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
> consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> Thanks,
> Ian
> Philippines
>|||yes uri is correct it is binary... thanks uri
"Uri Dimant" wrote:

> No , SQL Server stores it in BINARY format
>
>
> "Khwaja Arshaduddin" <KhwajaArshaduddin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote i
n
> message news:380520D9-7BEF-4CFF-82F8-486304BA5B38@.microsoft.com...
>
>|||At my last job, we used the database to store tif images. The tifs were
images of mandates which had bank details on so it made sense to store them
in the database as opposed to the filesystem. We took steps to try and ensur
e
the best performance, such as putting the blob column into a seperate
filegroup which we put onto a seperate raid array to the main database. The
mandates were scanned in as tifs, inserted into the db, and were viewable
from an asp front end, and tbh the solution worked well.
From a performance pov it'll be down to the quality of product, and the spec
of the machine.. ..a decent storage solution for this is a must.. ..also
spend some time on capacity planning, you'll find the db will grow quickly s
o
spend some time setting it up properly from the start...
"Ian" wrote:

> Hi,
> We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
> 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
> any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
> will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
> consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> Thanks,
> Ian
> Philippines
>

Breaking Point

Hi,
We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
Thanks,
Ian
PhilippinesIt will not be good practice to place huge pictures in BLOBs in sql server.if
possible you can arrange an file or image server and mapp them to application.
"Ian" wrote:
> Hi,
> We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
> 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
> any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
> will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
> consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> Thanks,
> Ian
> Philippines
>|||If you can, place pictures in filesystem and links to them in database.
MC
"Ian" <Ian@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DC7B1026-6DB6-493A-9B99-8CF719840007@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
> 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
> any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
> will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
> consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> Thanks,
> Ian
> Philippines
>|||Thanks,
Do you know of any breaking points with SQL Server 2005 and WIndows Server
2003?
Ian
"Khwaja Arshaduddin" wrote:
> It will not be good practice to place huge pictures in BLOBs in sql server.if
> possible you can arrange an file or image server and mapp them to application.
>
> "Ian" wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
> > 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> > I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
> > any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> >
> > There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
> > will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> >
> > I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
> > consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ian
> > Philippines
> >|||Why is it not good practive to place pics in BLOBs?
Thanks again,
Ian
"Khwaja Arshaduddin" wrote:
> It will not be good practice to place huge pictures in BLOBs in sql server.if
> possible you can arrange an file or image server and mapp them to application.
>
> "Ian" wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
> > 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> > I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
> > any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> >
> > There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
> > will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> >
> > I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
> > consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ian
> > Philippines
> >|||As i posted earlier LARGE image file should not be loaded that is becuase
BLOBs store picture as text datatype u can find datatype in BOL .there will
be a severe impact on performance of database
"Ian" wrote:
> Why is it not good practive to place pics in BLOBs?
> Thanks again,
> Ian
> "Khwaja Arshaduddin" wrote:
> > It will not be good practice to place huge pictures in BLOBs in sql server.if
> > possible you can arrange an file or image server and mapp them to application.
> >
> >
> > "Ian" wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
> > > 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> > > I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
> > > any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> > >
> > > There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
> > > will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> > >
> > > I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
> > > consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Ian
> > > Philippines
> > >|||> As i posted earlier LARGE image file should not be loaded that is becuase
> BLOBs store picture as text datatype u can find datatype in BOL .there
> will
> be a severe impact on performance of database
No , SQL Server stores it in BINARY format
"Khwaja Arshaduddin" <KhwajaArshaduddin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:380520D9-7BEF-4CFF-82F8-486304BA5B38@.microsoft.com...
> As i posted earlier LARGE image file should not be loaded that is becuase
> BLOBs store picture as text datatype u can find datatype in BOL .there
> will
> be a severe impact on performance of database
> "Ian" wrote:
>> Why is it not good practive to place pics in BLOBs?
>> Thanks again,
>> Ian
>> "Khwaja Arshaduddin" wrote:
>> > It will not be good practice to place huge pictures in BLOBs in sql
>> > server.if
>> > possible you can arrange an file or image server and mapp them to
>> > application.
>> >
>> >
>> > "Ian" wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS
>> > > Server
>> > > 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
>> > > I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can
>> > > foresee
>> > > any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
>> > >
>> > > There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server.
>> > > Where
>> > > will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
>> > >
>> > > I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by
>> > > an IT
>> > > consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > >
>> > > Ian
>> > > Philippines
>> > >|||Hi
You may want to read
http://databases.aspfaq.com/database/should-i-store-images-in-the-database-or-the-filesystem.html
As far as breaking point this is will be significntly dependent on the
hardware and application, therefore running your own performance/stress tests
is about the only way you are really going to have some idea of what the
system is capable of. Products such as LoadRunner, Rational Performance
Tester, Visual Studio Team Edition for Software Testers
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/teamsystem/aa718823.aspx or Visual Studio
Team Suite can all help you performance test your web application(s).
John
"Ian" wrote:
> Hi,
> We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
> 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
> any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
> will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
> consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> Thanks,
> Ian
> Philippines
>|||yes uri is correct it is binary... thanks uri
"Uri Dimant" wrote:
> > As i posted earlier LARGE image file should not be loaded that is becuase
> > BLOBs store picture as text datatype u can find datatype in BOL .there
> > will
> > be a severe impact on performance of database
> No , SQL Server stores it in BINARY format
>
>
> "Khwaja Arshaduddin" <KhwajaArshaduddin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:380520D9-7BEF-4CFF-82F8-486304BA5B38@.microsoft.com...
> > As i posted earlier LARGE image file should not be loaded that is becuase
> > BLOBs store picture as text datatype u can find datatype in BOL .there
> > will
> > be a severe impact on performance of database
> >
> > "Ian" wrote:
> >
> >> Why is it not good practive to place pics in BLOBs?
> >>
> >> Thanks again,
> >>
> >> Ian
> >>
> >> "Khwaja Arshaduddin" wrote:
> >>
> >> > It will not be good practice to place huge pictures in BLOBs in sql
> >> > server.if
> >> > possible you can arrange an file or image server and mapp them to
> >> > application.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Ian" wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi,
> >> > >
> >> > > We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS
> >> > > Server
> >> > > 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> >> > > I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can
> >> > > foresee
> >> > > any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> >> > >
> >> > > There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server.
> >> > > Where
> >> > > will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> >> > >
> >> > > I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by
> >> > > an IT
> >> > > consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks,
> >> > >
> >> > > Ian
> >> > > Philippines
> >> > >
>
>|||At my last job, we used the database to store tif images. The tifs were
images of mandates which had bank details on so it made sense to store them
in the database as opposed to the filesystem. We took steps to try and ensure
the best performance, such as putting the blob column into a seperate
filegroup which we put onto a seperate raid array to the main database. The
mandates were scanned in as tifs, inserted into the db, and were viewable
from an asp front end, and tbh the solution worked well.
From a performance pov it'll be down to the quality of product, and the spec
of the machine.. ..a decent storage solution for this is a must.. ..also
spend some time on capacity planning, you'll find the db will grow quickly so
spend some time setting it up properly from the start...
"Ian" wrote:
> Hi,
> We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
> 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
> any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
> will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
> consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> Thanks,
> Ian
> Philippines
>|||Ian:
You'll love my response. It's the same as pretty much all of my other
responses:
"It depends".
Do you need to store your images transactionally? That is, it
critically important that your images are there when the database SAYS
they're there? If so, put 'em in the database.
Do you need to read the files from something like a Web server which
serves up a lot of other static content? If so, lean towards the
filesystem.
How big are these files? "Huge" means something very different these
days vs. 5 years ago. What are your size projections? A couple of
gigs? No problem, either way. A couple of terabytes? Do you want to
minimize the load on the database when retrieving images? How many
users are you going to support? These are all considerations.
Note that you'll have to be much more careful about how you size your
database files with the images inside the DB. I'd (sometimes, it
depends) recommend putting the tables storing the images in a different
filegroup...
Also note that in SQL Server 2005, you should use VARBINARY(MAX) instead
of IMAGE. IMAGE and TEXT datatypes are deprecated as of the new version.
-Dave
Ian wrote:
> Hi,
> We recently bought MS SQL Server 2005 (Standard Ed, 32bit) and MS Server
> 2003 (Standard Ed, 32bit) for our company.
> I would like to know the breaking point of the following so we can foresee
> any problems and perhaps be able to avoid them.
> There will be a huge amount of pictures to be stored in our server. Where
> will pics be stored? as BLOBS in SQL or as files?
> I am new to this and appreciate any info. We have been ripped off by an IT
> consultant before so am trying to learn as well.
> Thanks,
> Ian
> Philippines
>
-Dave Markle
http://www.markleconsulting.com/blog

Breaking a dataset into chunks

Hey everyone. I'm trying to recreate some Excel reports my company has
been issuing for the last few years using Reporting Services (data is
coming from an Analysis Services cube now). The reports display
information over a retail hierarchy. Here's what I'm trying to do for
one of them: On one report issued for every entity that has children,
there are five columns of space allotted for key measures on each of
the children (and the report needs to expand to the necessary number
of pages for all children to be displayed, up to five per page). Then,
immediately next to it on each page, the same information about the
current entity and its hierarchy parents must be put in on each page.
There would be up to four columns here. At first I tried fitting this
into two matrix controls, but I quickly realized that SSRS will
process the first matrix for all records in its dataset before getting
to the second one, forcing it to start displaying it no sooner than
the last page of the first matrix. If anyone knows a brilliant way to
allow two unlike-sized datasets to be used in two matrices that can
interrupt each other to get data onto a page, by all means let me know
(I'm not holding my breath for that one though).
This brings me to my actual question. The next solution we've come up
with, as much as we don't like it, is assuming a maximum of 25
children for any entity and creating five separate pages, each one
with a matrix that pulls in a maximum of five records. This of course
probably means five datasets, unless I can set up filtering to limit
which rows from the dataset are being used for each control. So, my
question is this: can anyone suggest a good way to either A) break the
dataset into chunks of <=5 records, or B) filter the each page's
control so that it only takes the appropriate <=5 records, without
redisplaying a record that was already displayed on a previous page?
Any help would be MUCH appreciated. Thanks!On Jan 22, 11:41=A0am, adam.schm...@.gmail.com wrote:
> If anyone knows a brilliant way to
> allow two unlike-sized datasets to be used in two matrices that can
> interrupt each other to get data onto a page, by all means let me know
> (I'm not holding my breath for that one though).
If I understand your problem, you could: Put each object into a
Rectangle object, then align the Rectangles to have the same Top edge,
and align the Right edge of the left rectangle to meet the Left edge
of the right rectangle.
> So, my
> question is this: can anyone suggest a good way to either A) break the
> dataset into chunks of <=3D5 records,
If your source data is a SQL Server, then try using the ROW_Number()
OVER ( ORDER BY FIELD ) function in the statement to generate row
numbers. Then, you can group by ( RowNumber - RowNumber Mod 5 ) to
create groups of 5.
> or B) filter the each page's
> control so that it only takes the appropriate <=3D5 records, without
> redisplaying a record that was already displayed on a previous page?
You could create a group as defined in (A), then put the Group in a
List object, then go to the List's properties and check the Page Break
at End. Then put all your display stuff inside the List. There are
probably other ways of doing this.
-- Scott|||Thanks Scott! I got as far as the two rectangles idea and it almost
worked -- there was only one problem. I need to have the same four
columns of information on each page in the right matrix, whereas the
left matrix just needs to expand to the size of the dataset. This is
so that for example a district manager could look at each attribute on
any page of five stores (from the left matrix) and compare it to his
entire district, his districts region, the rest of the stores in the
same brand division, and the entire company's performance (in the
right matrix). Again, five or less stores per page. Since these are
coming from different data sets, I'm having issues getting the two
data sets to repeat the same amount of times and getting the page
breaks to happen in the right places.
This provided a great jumping-off point for me, though, and I have a
hack solution that will work, although it's not great. The second
matrix can simply be replaced by four columns of textboxes, each one
displaying a specific data point. Instead of the "parents" dataset
containing up to four records, I'll need to use four datasets, each
containing up to one. Then the textboxes can display the first value
in each of those datasets for the appropriate field. Each column of
textboxes (or all four) can then be nested in a rectangle and the
rectangle can be set to repeat with the first matrix.
Obviously, this is labor-intensive, and kind of a pain, especially
given some of the formatting constraints that are going to come up.
So... if anyone knows a way to circumvent using 4 columns, 25 text
boxes each, that still allows me to set the RepeatWith property to the
left matrix, I'm all ears.
Thanks!
On Jan 22, 11:00 am, Orne <polysilly...@.yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jan 22, 11:41 am, adam.schm...@.gmail.com wrote:
> > If anyone knows a brilliant way to
> > allow two unlike-sized datasets to be used in two matrices that can
> > interrupt each other to get data onto a page, by all means let me know
> > (I'm not holding my breath for that one though).
> If I understand your problem, you could: Put each object into a
> Rectangle object, then align the Rectangles to have the same Top edge,
> and align the Right edge of the left rectangle to meet the Left edge
> of the right rectangle.
> > So, my
> > question is this: can anyone suggest a good way to either A) break the
> > dataset into chunks of <=5 records,
> If your source data is a SQL Server, then try using the ROW_Number()
> OVER ( ORDER BY FIELD ) function in the statement to generate row
> numbers. Then, you can group by ( RowNumber - RowNumber Mod 5 ) to
> create groups of 5.
> > or B) filter the each page's
> > control so that it only takes the appropriate <=5 records, without
> > redisplaying a record that was already displayed on a previous page?
> You could create a group as defined in (A), then put the Group in a
> List object, then go to the List's properties and check the Page Break
> at End. Then put all your display stuff inside the List. There are
> probably other ways of doing this.
> -- Scott

bp server with the lowest price

bp server with the lowest price

Our company is a proffesional deticated bullet proof server and general server provider in china. If you're looking for a reliable and long term cooperation bp server provider, it deservers you to read our company file to know more about us.

we have the lowest price for bp server.

http://www.serverinchina.com/bpserverservice/index.htm

ICQ:226745581 MSN:dqkj#hotmail.com

ICQ:329211498 MSN:jiemie11#hotmail.com

Email: serverinchina#yahoo.com.cn
Website: www.mailinchina.com www.serverinchina.comproffesional deticated bullet proof server << spelling does'nt fill me with confidence ;-)|||I don't need a bullet-proof server. I need an IT-Manager proof one!|||You definitely deservers one.|||That's why there are no bullet points in the posting. So managers overlook it. Thus bullet-proof.|||Yes but is it shoulder fired missle proof?

Boy am in big trouble!

I just got finished developing the company intranet site and thinking that everything was working I boasted about how good it was by getting my boss to login and submit a new job to the db (new job, its a work management app) while i did the same, the pland was to hit the submit button at the same time. He would send one to be read by me and I would send one to be read by him. We both hit submit and the following happened.

The db has somehow fused the two into one. I thought maybe we were to accurate in hitting the submit button together. But I even gave a five second delay between and for some reason the job is being overriden by one user tor the other. In other words we are both sharing the same jobid. I thought this could never happen with sql server supposing that it would lock one request until another was completed and vice versa. But I'm so new to this that I'm just so naieve to think that the db would do this for you. Problem is I'm about to move on and I can't leave the app in this state. Can anyone point to some articles or give some suggestions has to my situation. Most desperately in need!!

Thanks in advanceoh crap. that's insane man. what's the db architecture, and are you using procedures to do the transactions? need more info. it shouldn't allow multiple inserts to be merged into one unless you're using a datatable to hold the data, and you're doing that incorrectly.|||In fact, if you want, just aim me in the morning. PST, and I'll help you out then, and post the logs here.|||I use stored procedures and transactions.

Where do i get the logs?|||Nevermind. Actually.. I can't see how this is happening.

In fact, it's impossible unless you're creating the primary key manually, or trying to do something uncommonly complicated, and messed up along the way.|||This is what I'm doing and It makes sense why it doing this but I'm not sure of a solution.

Let me explain.

I have two processes.

I add a job to my db, the job contains a title, date, time etc.

When the user submits it they are returned a job number from the db. They then need to add a note that goes along with the job. This job is stored in a job table

A job can have many notes but they must add at least one, thats the default behaviour. When having submitted the note the details are stored in a note table, its foreign key is the jobid that was returned from the first insert.

IE I can access all the notes by its jobid.

The problem occurs when two people do this

User A : Adds a job

User B : Adds a job

I think user a's jobid is being written over by user b. Therefore when (user a) add a note they are actually submitting the note to the jobid of user b.

Now thats my hunch. And it certainly explains the behaviour. Problem is that I can't really afford to change the structure of the entire thing right now. What would really help is if I was able to prevent (user a's) job number from being over written. I'm using static vars.

Any suggestions would be most helpful!!|||dont you have a username/userid column tht you can use to differentiate among users ?|||I'm going to go on a limb, and assume the JobID foriegn key is an int - Identity with an increment seed of 1 right?|||I found the problem and it had nothing to do with my db. I was using a property to store my jobid, which meant that the last person to add a new job would be overwritting the previous persons job id. If user a had'nt submitted is note before user b added a new job the user a's job id would be overwritten by users b's. So user a would be submitting a note with a foreign keys from user b.

Now I know what going on I am kinda on the road to recovery.

I just need to figure out what kind of variable I can use to persist a jobid across different users so they don't overwrite one another. I'm thinking session variables. But I'm so new at this I'm not sure if theres a better way?|||property? you aren't creating a new instance of the object, and sharing it between multiple calls? That's a bit unstable don't you think?|||Sometimes we learn those hard lessons through trial and error.|||I hear ya. :) I've done the same before actually.

this is OT, but hope it makes you feel better... two nights ago, I made a while loop with three nested loops and two methods. Two of the methods work with each other to determine the end of the loop. Let's just say I forgot to set the condition to false. :) Saw my ram go straight to 2gigs of usage from a single process.

And yeah, I've done some pretty interesting things that when looking back now.. I scoff at myself, but you're right, it's a live and learn ordeal.

Good luck in finishing.