Restrict Database Viewing

One of our programmers is going to write a program that involves some
sensitive data stored in the SQL server, using visual basic. Is there a way
to restrict him from viewing the data in the database, yet allowing him to d
o
his programming and debugging?Rather than developing against the live production database, consider
developing the application against a test database with identical schema.
You can use test data or obfuscated production data for testing.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"wrytat" <wrytat@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5118B0AD-451A-406E-81F9-F6EFA426B00E@.microsoft.com...
> One of our programmers is going to write a program that involves some
> sensitive data stored in the SQL server, using visual basic. Is there a
> way
> to restrict him from viewing the data in the database, yet allowing him to
> do
> his programming and debugging?|||I spend a lot of time writing apps against sensitive data, and often have to
explain to clients that valid data is needed to test against.
If you want to limit access to certain tables just create a user with
disabled access to sensitive table and allow only access to tables they will
use.
If the tables that they need, have actual sensitive data in them, then
create a duplicate database with different user and change some data.
i.e.. if its salary then directly edit the duplicate database and change all
the names and passwords to random data.
My suggestion is to have a third reliable party to backup database change
the sensitive data and return with another database name.
Then just hand that database on cd to your programmer.
As a second thought if its only reading i.e.. reports then create required
tables and fields as views.
"wrytat" <wrytat@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5118B0AD-451A-406E-81F9-F6EFA426B00E@.microsoft.com...
> One of our programmers is going to write a program that involves some
> sensitive data stored in the SQL server, using visual basic. Is there a
> way
> to restrict him from viewing the data in the database, yet allowing him to
> do
> his programming and debugging?

Restoring from Backup without logs

We have received a backup file that is 6G in size. The log file is
about 74G while the MDF is about 5 G when we restored. Is there a way
to run a SQL script to restore the .BAK file without restoring the log
file as we do not have enough space on the server.

PS. We are running Sql2K5.

Thanks!GM,

See my recent entry under "Restore database with no log". From what I
just went through, I think that your first and best option is to
tell the database owner/administrator to do a backup of the
transaction log, shrink the file and then send you
another backup. If you can't do that, you'll have to find a server
with enough disk space (NTFS, not FAT) to
on which to restore your backup so that you can shrink the logs
yourself. See Erland's advice to me on this matter.

http://groups.google.com/group/comp...0626d528f12287c
Bill E.

GM wrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

We have received a backup file that is 6G in size. The log file is
about 74G while the MDF is about 5 G when we restored. Is there a way
to run a SQL script to restore the .BAK file without restoring the log
file as we do not have enough space on the server.
>
PS. We are running Sql2K5.
>
Thanks!

Restoring from a fixed allocated database?

We have a backup of a database that is from a database with a fixed
allocation size of 300GB. The actual data itself is small, is there any way
to restore this database without needing 300+GB of space?
Thanks!Not really. You either have to shrink the existing db and do another backup
or export the data and import it into a copy of the db schema (that has much
smaller files).
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Steven H" <heinz_steven@.emc.com> wrote in message
news:e0qhLigzGHA.4204@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> We have a backup of a database that is from a database with a fixed
> allocation size of 300GB. The actual data itself is small, is there any
> way to restore this database without needing 300+GB of space?
> Thanks!
>