|
* Go to the object explorer (from the menu "View", "Object Explorer")
* Go to the "database" node of the treeview and select your database.
* Right-click the node and select the item "Tasks" and from there the subitem "Export Data".
* Click next, and select the database from SQL Server that you want to export from.
* Click next, and select "Microsoft Access" as your destination. You'll probably need an existing database.
* Follow the wizard until finished with exporting 
I are Troll
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
I would like to generate MAC addresses between a certain range in a stored procedure. The MAC addresses needed to be stored in a table.
Any ideas? Suggestions?
I need something like below
DECLARE @Max_MAC BINARY(8)
DECLARE @StartRange BINARY(8)
DECLARE @EndRange BINARY(8)
DECLARE @MAC_Address BINARY(8)
SET @StartRange = 0x00000004A500114B
SET @EndRange = 0x00000004A50F11FF
SELECT @Max_MAC = MAX(MAC_Address)
FROM MAC_Address
IF (@Max_Mac >= @StartRange and @Max_Mac < @EndRange)
begin
@Max_Mac = generate a higher macaddress
INSERT INTO MAC_Address(MAC_Address,Timestamp) VALUES (@MAX_MAC, getdate())
END
I do not know how I can count a number more to the MAcAdress I would like to become to a table with macadresses like
0x00000004A500114B
0x00000004A500114C
0x00000004A500114D
...
Thanks in advance
Tom Denys
|
|
|
|
|
Mac address is the primary address of a Network Interface that uniquely identifies a PC.
why you need to generate MAC Addresses ?
If you need to generate unique id why not you use GUID s ... 
|
|
|
|
|
I need to generate Mac address because we Program a Mac address in different kind of PCB's (like network cards) We want to trace the Mac address that we program in the PCB's. We get difefrent ranges that we use for that.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Mac addresses are 8-byte (unsigned) numbers that typically get shown in hex with or without dashes in between bytes. You could hold their numeric value in a System.UInt64 (for .NET programming languages), show them with ToString("X16"), and handle them as NUMERIC in SQL according to this[^].
I think that beats the alternative of handling them as strings, since then you would have to implement some code to "hex increment" a string...
BTW: I would rather not have to store a range of MAC addresses, unless I were a manufacturer of network equipment that is.
Luc Pattyn
Have a look at my entry for the lean-and-mean competition; please provide comments, feedback, discussion, and don’t forget to vote for it! Thank you.
Local announcement (Antwerp region): Lange Wapper? Neen!
|
|
|
|
|
how to connect sql to java netbeans6.7 for validating user detail .................
|
|
|
|
|
Is it Related to Database
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Actually i want rows in the table in an order. How can i force the tables to keep that order? is there any command for that. Actually i am inserting the data row from asp.net front end.
|
|
|
|
|
srikantha_nagaraj wrote: Actually i want rows in the table in an order.
Sort the table.
srikantha_nagaraj wrote: How can i force the tables to keep that order?
By definition, you can't. A table is a collection of rows that's saved in a random order. You can read them back and order by any field that's present within that selection. You could also add a custom field to indicate the order of the rows, but you'd still need to 'order by' that particular field.
You can, alternatively, create a stored procedure that selects all your rows and sort them. Next, hide the table and give the user only access to your sproc. That would not stop anyone from re-sorting the dataset though.
I are Troll
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the answer.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: srikantha_nagaraj wrote:
How can i force the tables to keep that order?
By definition, you can't.
That's not strictly true, Tables will be stored in the order of their clustered index. This then forms the "default" order.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I added a five, that should even it out.
J4amieC wrote: That's not strictly true, Tables will be stored in the order of their clustered index. This then forms the "default" order
The rows in a RDBMS are not interdependent, same goes for the columns. They might not be returned in the order that they're saved. Because there is no relation between the rows themselves (except that they belong to the same table) there is no order in the collection. This may vary depending on each implementation of course.
Now, that's just theory that I swallowed a long time ago. I found that the most simple table in Access has a storage-order, and I have seen people abuse it. Most of the time, it's easier to add a custom column and sort on that.
I've been reading up after your comment, and a clustered index[^] seems indeed to be the solution
Yes?
|
|
|
|
|
That's not strictly true either! The only way to guarantee output order is using an order by clause.
|
|
|
|
|
That makes it also not strictly false 
public enum strictBool { true, false, EFileNotFound }
|
|
|
|
|
Use Order By clause of SQL. It orders the output.
|
|
|
|
|
You have already asked this question and had correct replies. A database does NOT guarantee the order records are returned in UNLESS you have an order by clause. If there is a clustered index or primary key then this is the default order, but even then it is NOT guaranteed (certanly by SQL Server) as when you have multiple worker processe, unless an order by is specified he results are returned as each worker process completes, which MAY not be the expected order.
If you hav any further doubts try reading up on it, there are thousands of articles on google
Bob
Ashfield Consultants Ltd
Proud to be a 2009 Code Project MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Dear All,
I have created replication in a single Database more than 20 times, since three years.
now i have seen some thing amazing,
In every replication the size of log file increases double the size of original file.
as If the first log file is 1 GB then the new one is 2 GB
I used to shrink this too, but i could not get any success, why its like this?
what should i use in order to decrease this log.
Note: I am using SQL 2005
Abdul Rahaman Hamidy
Database Developer
Kabul, Afghanistan
|
|
|
|
|
Abdul Rahman Hamidy wrote: I used to shrink this too, but i could not get any success, why its like this?
It's there for your own security[^], I guess that the Recovery Model for the database is set to "Full". (Right click database, properties, options)
There's an article here[^] that might help in shrinking it
I are Troll
|
|
|
|
|
thx, i think link can help me alot
Abdul Rahaman Hamidy
Database Developer
Kabul, Afghanistan
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think you can call them "Urgent!"
However you could call them "Urgent1", "Urgent2", "Urgent3", etc.
A database wouldn't be very useful if you couldn't name your tables, would it?
Luc Pattyn
Have a look at my entry for the lean-and-mean competition; please provide comments, feedback, discussion, and don’t forget to vote for it! Thank you.
Local announcement (Antwerp region): Lange Wapper? Neen!
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I have a master DB server, I need to update 4 more DB servers with data from 10 tables on the master. All tables and DB structures are the same on all servers. We need 4 because of traffic load.
So....
I was thinking of setting up a SSIS .DTSX package. Easy for 1 server to another. How do I get it look at 3 more ? Configuration XML file? Can I put in 4 database names, username and passwords and get it to FORLOOP? Do i have the data in a separate table, load it into an object in the package and FORLOOP that?
Or do I create 4 packages and schedule them next to each other ! That would be the easiest.
Any help would be welcome.
Harvey
|
|
|
|
|
I would go with 1 package, and configure it to run 4 times with different configurations for the destinations.
|
|
|
|
|
The 4 different configurations can all be put in 1 XML file? Any ideas would be gladly received.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
