restrict update trigger to updated rows

How do I restrict an update trigger to just the rows updated?
Would like to have two audit fields with user and time of modification for
updates.
The following trigger would attempt to update all rows in the table:
ALTER trigger tm_stmp_admit_proc
on dbo.tblAdmissions_procedures
for update
as
begin
update tblAdmissions_procedures
set time_stamp = current_timestamp,user_modify = system_user
end
Couldn't find any description in BOL analogous to the FOR EACH ROW parameter
in
PostgreSQL:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION public.timestamper()
RETURNS trigger AS
'
BEGIN
NEW.time_stamp := \'now\';
NEW.user_modify := current_user;
RETURN NEW;
END;
'
LANGUAGE 'plpgsql' VOLATILE;
CREATE TRIGGER timestamper
BEFORE INSERT OR UPDATE
ON public.admit_procedures
FOR EACH ROW
EXECUTE PROCEDURE public.timestamper();
Thanks,
David P. Lurie
If you have a primary key column in the table
use INSERTED table in the trigger.
like
update tblAdmissions_procedures
set time_stamp = current_timestamp,user_modify = system_user
where exists ( select keycolumn from inserted
where tblAdmissions_procedures.keycolumn = inserted.keycolumn )
but, then u may also have to set this parameter
SET RECURSIVE_TRIGGERS OFF
HTH
Faris
"David P. Lurie" <abc@.def.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:%23Di0ArVbEHA.2944@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> How do I restrict an update trigger to just the rows updated?
> Would like to have two audit fields with user and time of modification for
> updates.
> The following trigger would attempt to update all rows in the table:
> ALTER trigger tm_stmp_admit_proc
> on dbo.tblAdmissions_procedures
> for update
> as
> begin
> update tblAdmissions_procedures
> set time_stamp = current_timestamp,user_modify = system_user
> end
> Couldn't find any description in BOL analogous to the FOR EACH ROW
parameter
> in
> PostgreSQL:
> CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION public.timestamper()
> RETURNS trigger AS
> '
> BEGIN
> NEW.time_stamp := \'now\';
> NEW.user_modify := current_user;
> RETURN NEW;
> END;
> '
> LANGUAGE 'plpgsql' VOLATILE;
> CREATE TRIGGER timestamper
> BEFORE INSERT OR UPDATE
> ON public.admit_procedures
> FOR EACH ROW
> EXECUTE PROCEDURE public.timestamper();
> Thanks,
> David P. Lurie
>
|||Thanks a lot -
I tested this on two of the tables, and seems to work. Didn't turn off
recursive triggers to see whether it was necessary, and no problems thus far
with a few updates on each table. Assume that infinite loop would have
occurred if that setting was needed.
David P. Lurie
"Faris" <faris@.bss-india.com> wrote in message
news:eTBHKhWbEHA.3944@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> If you have a primary key column in the table
> use INSERTED table in the trigger.
> like
> update tblAdmissions_procedures
> set time_stamp = current_timestamp,user_modify = system_user
> where exists ( select keycolumn from inserted
> where tblAdmissions_procedures.keycolumn = inserted.keycolumn )
> but, then u may also have to set this parameter
> SET RECURSIVE_TRIGGERS OFF
> HTH
> Faris

Restrict result rows with a database setting

I am using SQL Server 2000 SP4. Is it possible to limit the number of
returned rows in a query via some sort of database setting? We have a
customer table with over 100,000 records and are not able to modify the
application that queries this table.
If our users do not put in selection criteria, they get all 100,000 records
and subsequently crash the machine they are running from. I was wondering if
I could limit the maximum number of rows to 10,000 via a database setting? I
know I could do that via the SQL that is called, but I co not have control
over that.
Thanks for any suggestions,
Butch Smith
Hi
I guess you could try setting the configuration value of "query governor
cost limit" to a given value, but then it could have adverse effects else
where. You should look at getting the application changed to limit the time a
query takes and also making sure that an excessive number of records are not
returned.
John
"Butch" wrote:

> I am using SQL Server 2000 SP4. Is it possible to limit the number of
> returned rows in a query via some sort of database setting? We have a
> customer table with over 100,000 records and are not able to modify the
> application that queries this table.
> If our users do not put in selection criteria, they get all 100,000 records
> and subsequently crash the machine they are running from. I was wondering if
> I could limit the maximum number of rows to 10,000 via a database setting? I
> know I could do that via the SQL that is called, but I co not have control
> over that.
>
> Thanks for any suggestions,
> Butch Smith
>
>
|||You could try query govenor to limit the time a query can run for.
sp_configure 'query governor cost limit', '300'
Hilary Cotter
Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
positions, strategies or opinions.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Butch" <smithb@.R3M0V3_CAPStntfireworks.com> wrote in message
news:%238kiT4r8GHA.2120@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I am using SQL Server 2000 SP4. Is it possible to limit the number of
>returned rows in a query via some sort of database setting? We have a
>customer table with over 100,000 records and are not able to modify the
>application that queries this table.
> If our users do not put in selection criteria, they get all 100,000
> records and subsequently crash the machine they are running from. I was
> wondering if I could limit the maximum number of rows to 10,000 via a
> database setting? I know I could do that via the SQL that is called, but I
> co not have control over that.
>
> Thanks for any suggestions,
> Butch Smith
>
|||Maybe you can try to create a view with a select top of the table and rename
the table of 100000 records. Then create instead of triggers to make the view
updatable. But the application could crash with other things after that...
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:

> You could try query govenor to limit the time a query can run for.
> sp_configure 'query governor cost limit', '300'
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
> RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
> This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
> positions, strategies or opinions.
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Butch" <smithb@.R3M0V3_CAPStntfireworks.com> wrote in message
> news:%238kiT4r8GHA.2120@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>
>
sql

Restrict result rows with a database setting

I am using SQL Server 2000 SP4. Is it possible to limit the number of
returned rows in a query via some sort of database setting? We have a
customer table with over 100,000 records and are not able to modify the
application that queries this table.
If our users do not put in selection criteria, they get all 100,000 records
and subsequently crash the machine they are running from. I was wondering if
I could limit the maximum number of rows to 10,000 via a database setting? I
know I could do that via the SQL that is called, but I co not have control
over that.
Thanks for any suggestions,
Butch SmithHi
I guess you could try setting the configuration value of "query governor
cost limit" to a given value, but then it could have adverse effects else
where. You should look at getting the application changed to limit the time
a
query takes and also making sure that an excessive number of records are not
returned.
John
"Butch" wrote:

> I am using SQL Server 2000 SP4. Is it possible to limit the number of
> returned rows in a query via some sort of database setting? We have a
> customer table with over 100,000 records and are not able to modify the
> application that queries this table.
> If our users do not put in selection criteria, they get all 100,000 record
s
> and subsequently crash the machine they are running from. I was wondering
if
> I could limit the maximum number of rows to 10,000 via a database setting?
I
> know I could do that via the SQL that is called, but I co not have control
> over that.
>
> Thanks for any suggestions,
> Butch Smith
>
>|||You could try query govenor to limit the time a query can run for.
sp_configure 'query governor cost limit', '300'
Hilary Cotter
Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
positions, strategies or opinions.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Butch" <smithb@.R3M0V3_CAPStntfireworks.com> wrote in message
news:%238kiT4r8GHA.2120@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I am using SQL Server 2000 SP4. Is it possible to limit the number of
>returned rows in a query via some sort of database setting? We have a
>customer table with over 100,000 records and are not able to modify the
>application that queries this table.
> If our users do not put in selection criteria, they get all 100,000
> records and subsequently crash the machine they are running from. I was
> wondering if I could limit the maximum number of rows to 10,000 via a
> database setting? I know I could do that via the SQL that is called, but I
> co not have control over that.
>
> Thanks for any suggestions,
> Butch Smith
>|||Maybe you can try to create a view with a select top of the table and rename
the table of 100000 records. Then create instead of triggers to make the vie
w
updatable. But the application could crash with other things after that...
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:

> You could try query govenor to limit the time a query can run for.
> sp_configure 'query governor cost limit', '300'
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
> RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
> This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
> positions, strategies or opinions.
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Butch" <smithb@.R3M0V3_CAPStntfireworks.com> wrote in message
> news:%238kiT4r8GHA.2120@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>
>

Restrict result rows with a database setting

I am using SQL Server 2000 SP4. Is it possible to limit the number of
returned rows in a query via some sort of database setting? We have a
customer table with over 100,000 records and are not able to modify the
application that queries this table.
If our users do not put in selection criteria, they get all 100,000 records
and subsequently crash the machine they are running from. I was wondering if
I could limit the maximum number of rows to 10,000 via a database setting? I
know I could do that via the SQL that is called, but I co not have control
over that.
Thanks for any suggestions,
Butch SmithHi
I guess you could try setting the configuration value of "query governor
cost limit" to a given value, but then it could have adverse effects else
where. You should look at getting the application changed to limit the time a
query takes and also making sure that an excessive number of records are not
returned.
John
"Butch" wrote:
> I am using SQL Server 2000 SP4. Is it possible to limit the number of
> returned rows in a query via some sort of database setting? We have a
> customer table with over 100,000 records and are not able to modify the
> application that queries this table.
> If our users do not put in selection criteria, they get all 100,000 records
> and subsequently crash the machine they are running from. I was wondering if
> I could limit the maximum number of rows to 10,000 via a database setting? I
> know I could do that via the SQL that is called, but I co not have control
> over that.
>
> Thanks for any suggestions,
> Butch Smith
>
>|||You could try query govenor to limit the time a query can run for.
sp_configure 'query governor cost limit', '300'
--
Hilary Cotter
Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
positions, strategies or opinions.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Butch" <smithb@.R3M0V3_CAPStntfireworks.com> wrote in message
news:%238kiT4r8GHA.2120@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I am using SQL Server 2000 SP4. Is it possible to limit the number of
>returned rows in a query via some sort of database setting? We have a
>customer table with over 100,000 records and are not able to modify the
>application that queries this table.
> If our users do not put in selection criteria, they get all 100,000
> records and subsequently crash the machine they are running from. I was
> wondering if I could limit the maximum number of rows to 10,000 via a
> database setting? I know I could do that via the SQL that is called, but I
> co not have control over that.
>
> Thanks for any suggestions,
> Butch Smith
>|||Maybe you can try to create a view with a select top of the table and rename
the table of 100000 records. Then create instead of triggers to make the view
updatable. But the application could crash with other things after that...
"Hilary Cotter" wrote:
> You could try query govenor to limit the time a query can run for.
> sp_configure 'query governor cost limit', '300'
> --
> Hilary Cotter
> Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
> RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
> This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
> positions, strategies or opinions.
> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>
> "Butch" <smithb@.R3M0V3_CAPStntfireworks.com> wrote in message
> news:%238kiT4r8GHA.2120@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> >I am using SQL Server 2000 SP4. Is it possible to limit the number of
> >returned rows in a query via some sort of database setting? We have a
> >customer table with over 100,000 records and are not able to modify the
> >application that queries this table.
> >
> > If our users do not put in selection criteria, they get all 100,000
> > records and subsequently crash the machine they are running from. I was
> > wondering if I could limit the maximum number of rows to 10,000 via a
> > database setting? I know I could do that via the SQL that is called, but I
> > co not have control over that.
> >
> >
> > Thanks for any suggestions,
> >
> > Butch Smith
> >
>
>

Restoring rows accidentaly modified

Hello!
How can I Restore rows which are accidentaly modified.
I forgetted to put where condition in "Update" Query.
Now I want my data back. I have not taken back up manually yet.
I am using SQL Server 2000.
Please help.
Thank you,There is a way, but none via sql. As far as I know, you'rebasically SoL. Transactions can be rolled back, but you can't doit after it's already been commited. There's applications outthere that supposedly can do it, but I can't for the life of meremember the names of them.
Sorry man.
|||

Tsk tsk tsk ... let this be a lesson.
1) ***NEVER*** develop a DML script (UPD,INS,DEL) in production -- that's what a dev database is for
2) Backup your database every night or if possible, more often

|||

Alex Papadimoulis wrote:

Tsk tsk tsk ... let this be a lesson.

1) ***NEVER*** develop a DML script (UPD,INS,DEL) in production -- that's what a dev database is for

Well, I would assert that there are times where a DML script isneeded in production, and you don't have the luxury of using a devdatabase first. My suggestion is to ALWAYS wrap it in atransaction, with a ROLLBACK at the end, until you obtain the desiredresults.

BEGIN TRANSACTION
UPDATE
someTable
SET
someColumn = 'someValue'
WHERE
someCondition = 'True'
ROLLBACK -- change to COMMIT once you know you are updating the correct records

I ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS do this, lesson learned the hard way.

Restoring deleted records with out of row blobs?

I have a database that had a number of rows in multiple tables deleted -
fortunately there was very little activity after these deletions (mostly more
deletions a few days later).
I have the log files, but the original inserts just have the pointer to the
blob. I tried generating undo scripts with apexsql Log but it doesn't even
reference the blob column when the script generates (restoring from a
detached mdf does give the pointer, but that pointer doesn't go anywhere and
a select on it is blank/null).
How is one supposed to go about restoring records / rolling back a
transaction log for deleting a row with an out-of-row blob? Am I totally
screwed even though nothing else happened in the database aside from the
deletes before the backup was taken?
"Andrew Meinert" <AndrewMeinert@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5CE119C0-80AE-4A16-A452-799A41971BC5@.microsoft.com...
>I have a database that had a number of rows in multiple tables deleted -
> fortunately there was very little activity after these deletions (mostly
> more
> deletions a few days later).
> I have the log files, but the original inserts just have the pointer to
> the
> blob. I tried generating undo scripts with apexsql Log but it doesn't
> even
> reference the blob column when the script generates (restoring from a
> detached mdf does give the pointer, but that pointer doesn't go anywhere
> and
> a select on it is blank/null).
> How is one supposed to go about restoring records / rolling back a
> transaction log for deleting a row with an out-of-row blob? Am I totally
> screwed even though nothing else happened in the database aside from the
> deletes before the backup was taken?
Use the last full backup and the subsequent log backups to do a
point-in-time restore to a new database. Then do INSERTS from the restored
database to your real database.
David
|||"David Browne" wrote:

> "Andrew Meinert" <AndrewMeinert@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5CE119C0-80AE-4A16-A452-799A41971BC5@.microsoft.com...
>
> Use the last full backup and the subsequent log backups to do a
> point-in-time restore to a new database. Then do INSERTS from the restored
> database to your real database.
> David
>
Unfortunately the database was created between full backups and the only
remaining full backup is after the fact. There's no way to roll back the
transactions from the ldf?
How are blobs handled in the transaction log? Is it just a limitation of
the log viewer that I'm using that I don't see the the anything about the
content of the blobs aside from the pointer in row?
|||"David Browne" wrote:

> "Andrew Meinert" <AndrewMeinert@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5CE119C0-80AE-4A16-A452-799A41971BC5@.microsoft.com...
>
> Use the last full backup and the subsequent log backups to do a
> point-in-time restore to a new database. Then do INSERTS from the restored
> database to your real database.
> David
>
So far it looks like
http://www.red-gate.com/products/SQL_Log_Rescue/index.htm will help me. My
frustrations seem to stem from a limitation with the other software I had
tried. I can see the correct data in the demo of log rescue... here's to
hoping.

Restoring deleted records with out of row blobs?

I have a database that had a number of rows in multiple tables deleted -
fortunately there was very little activity after these deletions (mostly more
deletions a few days later).
I have the log files, but the original inserts just have the pointer to the
blob. I tried generating undo scripts with apexsql Log but it doesn't even
reference the blob column when the script generates (restoring from a
detached mdf does give the pointer, but that pointer doesn't go anywhere and
a select on it is blank/null).
How is one supposed to go about restoring records / rolling back a
transaction log for deleting a row with an out-of-row blob? Am I totally
screwed even though nothing else happened in the database aside from the
deletes before the backup was taken?"Andrew Meinert" <AndrewMeinert@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5CE119C0-80AE-4A16-A452-799A41971BC5@.microsoft.com...
>I have a database that had a number of rows in multiple tables deleted -
> fortunately there was very little activity after these deletions (mostly
> more
> deletions a few days later).
> I have the log files, but the original inserts just have the pointer to
> the
> blob. I tried generating undo scripts with apexsql Log but it doesn't
> even
> reference the blob column when the script generates (restoring from a
> detached mdf does give the pointer, but that pointer doesn't go anywhere
> and
> a select on it is blank/null).
> How is one supposed to go about restoring records / rolling back a
> transaction log for deleting a row with an out-of-row blob? Am I totally
> screwed even though nothing else happened in the database aside from the
> deletes before the backup was taken?
Use the last full backup and the subsequent log backups to do a
point-in-time restore to a new database. Then do INSERTS from the restored
database to your real database.
David|||"David Browne" wrote:
> "Andrew Meinert" <AndrewMeinert@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5CE119C0-80AE-4A16-A452-799A41971BC5@.microsoft.com...
> >I have a database that had a number of rows in multiple tables deleted -
> > fortunately there was very little activity after these deletions (mostly
> > more
> > deletions a few days later).
> >
> > I have the log files, but the original inserts just have the pointer to
> > the
> > blob. I tried generating undo scripts with apexsql Log but it doesn't
> > even
> > reference the blob column when the script generates (restoring from a
> > detached mdf does give the pointer, but that pointer doesn't go anywhere
> > and
> > a select on it is blank/null).
> >
> > How is one supposed to go about restoring records / rolling back a
> > transaction log for deleting a row with an out-of-row blob? Am I totally
> > screwed even though nothing else happened in the database aside from the
> > deletes before the backup was taken?
>
> Use the last full backup and the subsequent log backups to do a
> point-in-time restore to a new database. Then do INSERTS from the restored
> database to your real database.
> David
>
So far it looks like
http://www.red-gate.com/products/SQL_Log_Rescue/index.htm will help me. My
frustrations seem to stem from a limitation with the other software I had
tried. I can see the correct data in the demo of log rescue... here's to
hoping.

Restoring deleted records with out of row blobs?

I have a database that had a number of rows in multiple tables deleted -
fortunately there was very little activity after these deletions (mostly mor
e
deletions a few days later).
I have the log files, but the original inserts just have the pointer to the
blob. I tried generating undo scripts with apexsql Log but it doesn't even
reference the blob column when the script generates (restoring from a
detached mdf does give the pointer, but that pointer doesn't go anywhere and
a select on it is blank/null).
How is one supposed to go about restoring records / rolling back a
transaction log for deleting a row with an out-of-row blob? Am I totally
screwed even though nothing else happened in the database aside from the
deletes before the backup was taken?"Andrew Meinert" <AndrewMeinert@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5CE119C0-80AE-4A16-A452-799A41971BC5@.microsoft.com...
>I have a database that had a number of rows in multiple tables deleted -
> fortunately there was very little activity after these deletions (mostly
> more
> deletions a few days later).
> I have the log files, but the original inserts just have the pointer to
> the
> blob. I tried generating undo scripts with apexsql Log but it doesn't
> even
> reference the blob column when the script generates (restoring from a
> detached mdf does give the pointer, but that pointer doesn't go anywhere
> and
> a select on it is blank/null).
> How is one supposed to go about restoring records / rolling back a
> transaction log for deleting a row with an out-of-row blob? Am I totally
> screwed even though nothing else happened in the database aside from the
> deletes before the backup was taken?
Use the last full backup and the subsequent log backups to do a
point-in-time restore to a new database. Then do INSERTS from the restored
database to your real database.
David|||"David Browne" wrote:

> "Andrew Meinert" <AndrewMeinert@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
e
> news:5CE119C0-80AE-4A16-A452-799A41971BC5@.microsoft.com...
>
> Use the last full backup and the subsequent log backups to do a
> point-in-time restore to a new database. Then do INSERTS from the restore
d
> database to your real database.
> David
>
Unfortunately the database was created between full backups and the only
remaining full backup is after the fact. There's no way to roll back the
transactions from the ldf?
How are blobs handled in the transaction log? Is it just a limitation of
the log viewer that I'm using that I don't see the the anything about the
content of the blobs aside from the pointer in row?|||"David Browne" wrote:

> "Andrew Meinert" <AndrewMeinert@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in messag
e
> news:5CE119C0-80AE-4A16-A452-799A41971BC5@.microsoft.com...
>
> Use the last full backup and the subsequent log backups to do a
> point-in-time restore to a new database. Then do INSERTS from the restore
d
> database to your real database.
> David
>
So far it looks like
http://www.red-gate.com/products/SQ...escue/index.htm will help me. My
frustrations seem to stem from a limitation with the other software I had
tried. I can see the correct data in the demo of log rescue... here's to
hoping.