Question regarding DataSet file (xsd) like the ones used on 3-teir design tutorial

Hi everyone,

I have a question. I am using a DataSet file as my data layer in my app. I'm trying to create a event TableAdaptor where one of the queries has two paramaters (@.start & @.end). Those two variables are used to search for items that have start dates that fall in between the two.

Every time I try to use this, the smart tab always brings up three paramaters (DataTable, start as date, end as date). How the hell does that DataTable get thrown in there. I executed the query in the builder section and it only asks for the two variables.

Any idea on this one?

Thanks!

A dataset is a collection of datatables|||

That part I knew, I'm just wondering why it's asking for it. I've created numerous tableAdapter and this is the first one that inserted a variable I don't need.

Here is the query I'm using inside the xsd, as you can see I only have two variables (@.start & @.end), so why does it generate a third variable of type DataTable?

========================================================================================

SELECT eventID,
eventTitle,
eventDescription,
eventStartTimeDate,
eventEndTimeDate,
eventCategoryID,
( SELECT eventCategoryName
FROM eventCategories
WHERE eventCategoryID = events.eventCategoryID
) AS eventCategoryName
FROM events
WHERE (eventStartTimeDate >= @.start AND eventStartTimeDate < @.end)
AND active = 1

|||

Hi,

Is the DataTable variable generated for the Fill method of DataTable? If yes, it is by design.

The Fill method needs to know the destination the select data flows to. In this case, you will need to supply an argument of DataTable type.

HTH. If this does not answer your question, please feel free to mark the post as Not Answered and reply. Thank you!

Question on security

Hi,
I have a feeling what I want to do is not possible. I have a reportserver
(everything works fine) and I have an asp.net app which allows users to run
some reports. I dont use the reportviewer control, I just opent the report in
a new IE window by using url access e.g.
http://reportserver/reports/TimeReport&rs:command=render.
This works fine but is there a way of preventing users just typing in
http://reportserver/reports into the url and therefore accessing all the
reports. I know I could use windows authentication for the reports but I cant
do that for various reasons.
Is there any setting I can set on the http://reportserver/reports site to
only allow certain users access it but yet allow url access to reports as
normal using e.g. http://reportserver/reports/TimeReport&rs:command=render.
Its a bit of a contradiction really, I want the reportsite to be secure but
yet be able to run url access reports from it.
Thanks
NYou could deny access to the root from the report manager. Just allow
access to the subfolders/individual reports. Of course, they could then
directly access the subfolder...
Mike G.
"NH" <NH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:846A037D-582D-498E-A6A1-5BF59AA772AF@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I have a feeling what I want to do is not possible. I have a reportserver
> (everything works fine) and I have an asp.net app which allows users to
> run
> some reports. I dont use the reportviewer control, I just opent the report
> in
> a new IE window by using url access e.g.
> http://reportserver/reports/TimeReport&rs:command=render.
> This works fine but is there a way of preventing users just typing in
> http://reportserver/reports into the url and therefore accessing all the
> reports. I know I could use windows authentication for the reports but I
> cant
> do that for various reasons.
> Is there any setting I can set on the http://reportserver/reports site to
> only allow certain users access it but yet allow url access to reports as
> normal using e.g.
> http://reportserver/reports/TimeReport&rs:command=render.
> Its a bit of a contradiction really, I want the reportsite to be secure
> but
> yet be able to run url access reports from it.
> Thanks
> N
>|||Thanks Mike G, I dont think there is a way to do this.
"Mike G." wrote:
> You could deny access to the root from the report manager. Just allow
> access to the subfolders/individual reports. Of course, they could then
> directly access the subfolder...
> Mike G.
>
> "NH" <NH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:846A037D-582D-498E-A6A1-5BF59AA772AF@.microsoft.com...
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have a feeling what I want to do is not possible. I have a reportserver
> > (everything works fine) and I have an asp.net app which allows users to
> > run
> > some reports. I dont use the reportviewer control, I just opent the report
> > in
> > a new IE window by using url access e.g.
> > http://reportserver/reports/TimeReport&rs:command=render.
> >
> > This works fine but is there a way of preventing users just typing in
> > http://reportserver/reports into the url and therefore accessing all the
> > reports. I know I could use windows authentication for the reports but I
> > cant
> > do that for various reasons.
> >
> > Is there any setting I can set on the http://reportserver/reports site to
> > only allow certain users access it but yet allow url access to reports as
> > normal using e.g.
> > http://reportserver/reports/TimeReport&rs:command=render.
> > Its a bit of a contradiction really, I want the reportsite to be secure
> > but
> > yet be able to run url access reports from it.
> >
> > Thanks
> > N
> >
> >
>
>

Question on DTS

HI all,
Which is better, to use DTS for CSV type file imports or to write your own
import app.
Considering the following that it is most likely that the structure of the
import file will change a few times within the next year, and that this is
not inhouse but for an outside client, and that they would most probably be
using SQLXpress
Value your thoughts
Thanks
RobertDTS is the right tool for this task.
Although I would not be surprised if a very experienced C# developer with
basic DTS knowledge can write this application a lot faster than writing the
DTS package.
Ben Nevarez, MCDBA, OCP
Database Administrator
"Robert Bravery" wrote:

> HI all,
> Which is better, to use DTS for CSV type file imports or to write your own
> import app.
> Considering the following that it is most likely that the structure of the
> import file will change a few times within the next year, and that this is
> not inhouse but for an outside client, and that they would most probably b
e
> using SQLXpress
> Value your thoughts
> Thanks
> Robert
>
>|||Thanks Ben,
Next question:
How easy would it be to update the dts package on a clients machine when and
if structure and protocol changes.
Thanks
Robert
"Ben Nevarez" <bnevarez@.sjm.com> wrote in message
news:256513B7-AABF-4276-9E7F-2343D256C30B@.microsoft.com...
> DTS is the right tool for this task.
> Although I would not be surprised if a very experienced C# developer with
> basic DTS knowledge can write this application a lot faster than writing
the
> DTS package.
> Ben Nevarez, MCDBA, OCP
> Database Administrator
>
> "Robert Bravery" wrote:
>
own
the
is
be|||Using the DTS GUI Interface (DTS Designer) is very easy. Depending on the
complexity of your DTS package you may want to document what to do to
implement these future changes, instead of trying to understand how the
package works after you have not seen it for ws or months.
Ben Nevarez, MCDBA, OCP
Database Administrator
"Robert Bravery" wrote:

> Thanks Ben,
> Next question:
> How easy would it be to update the dts package on a clients machine when a
nd
> if structure and protocol changes.
> Thanks
> Robert
> "Ben Nevarez" <bnevarez@.sjm.com> wrote in message
> news:256513B7-AABF-4276-9E7F-2343D256C30B@.microsoft.com...
> the
> own
> the
> is
> be
>
>

Question on Application roles.

sql2k
Im comparing a username/ password to an App role/ password and Im just not
seeing the logic here. An App either needs to supply a username/ password or
a "sp_setapprole @.rolename = 'TestRole' ,@.password ='test'". Either way they
are granted access to the DB. Either way they can only execute what I allow
them too(A user cant run a SELECT if I dont grant him access.). How is this
any safer?
TIA, ChrisR
Even in the case of using an app role, you still need a login to the server.
The benefit of an app role is that you can share server credentials amongst
a variety of apps, while still keeping data security partitioned. It's just
another way of slicing and dicing from a security point of view. I don't
see one method as any safer or less safe than any other method...
Adam Machanic
Pro SQL Server 2005, available now
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=457
"ChrisR" <ChrisR@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:427310C9-210E-4A9F-A893-F8AE89A60E94@.microsoft.com...
> sql2k
> Im comparing a username/ password to an App role/ password and Im just not
> seeing the logic here. An App either needs to supply a username/ password
> or
> a "sp_setapprole @.rolename = 'TestRole' ,@.password ='test'". Either way
> they
> are granted access to the DB. Either way they can only execute what I
> allow
> them too(A user cant run a SELECT if I dont grant him access.). How is
> this
> any safer?
> TIA, ChrisR
|||Users do not have the password of the application role, only the application
has it.
One example is, users can have write access only thru the application role
but not using their Windows account. If they run the application they can
change data. If they use other tools like Query Analyzer or Access they would
not have write permissions.
Ben Nevarez, MCDBA, OCP
Database Administrator
"ChrisR" wrote:

> sql2k
> Im comparing a username/ password to an App role/ password and Im just not
> seeing the logic here. An App either needs to supply a username/ password or
> a "sp_setapprole @.rolename = 'TestRole' ,@.password ='test'". Either way they
> are granted access to the DB. Either way they can only execute what I allow
> them too(A user cant run a SELECT if I dont grant him access.). How is this
> any safer?
> TIA, ChrisR

Question on Application roles.

sql2k
Im comparing a username/ password to an App role/ password and Im just not
seeing the logic here. An App either needs to supply a username/ password or
a "sp_setapprole @.rolename = 'TestRole' ,@.password ='test'". Either way they
are granted access to the DB. Either way they can only execute what I allow
them too(A user cant run a SELECT if I dont grant him access.). How is this
any safer?
TIA, ChrisREven in the case of using an app role, you still need a login to the server.
The benefit of an app role is that you can share server credentials amongst
a variety of apps, while still keeping data security partitioned. It's just
another way of slicing and dicing from a security point of view. I don't
see one method as any safer or less safe than any other method...
Adam Machanic
Pro SQL Server 2005, available now
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=457
--
"ChrisR" <ChrisR@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:427310C9-210E-4A9F-A893-F8AE89A60E94@.microsoft.com...
> sql2k
> Im comparing a username/ password to an App role/ password and Im just not
> seeing the logic here. An App either needs to supply a username/ password
> or
> a "sp_setapprole @.rolename = 'TestRole' ,@.password ='test'". Either way
> they
> are granted access to the DB. Either way they can only execute what I
> allow
> them too(A user cant run a SELECT if I dont grant him access.). How is
> this
> any safer?
> TIA, ChrisR|||Users do not have the password of the application role, only the application
has it.
One example is, users can have write access only thru the application role
but not using their Windows account. If they run the application they can
change data. If they use other tools like Query Analyzer or Access they woul
d
not have write permissions.
Ben Nevarez, MCDBA, OCP
Database Administrator
"ChrisR" wrote:

> sql2k
> Im comparing a username/ password to an App role/ password and Im just not
> seeing the logic here. An App either needs to supply a username/ password
or
> a "sp_setapprole @.rolename = 'TestRole' ,@.password ='test'". Either way th
ey
> are granted access to the DB. Either way they can only execute what I allo
w
> them too(A user cant run a SELECT if I dont grant him access.). How is thi
s
> any safer?
> TIA, ChrisR

Question on Application roles.

sql2k
Im comparing a username/ password to an App role/ password and Im just not
seeing the logic here. An App either needs to supply a username/ password or
a "sp_setapprole @.rolename = 'TestRole' ,@.password ='test'". Either way they
are granted access to the DB. Either way they can only execute what I allow
them too(A user cant run a SELECT if I dont grant him access.). How is this
any safer?
TIA, ChrisREven in the case of using an app role, you still need a login to the server.
The benefit of an app role is that you can share server credentials amongst
a variety of apps, while still keeping data security partitioned. It's just
another way of slicing and dicing from a security point of view. I don't
see one method as any safer or less safe than any other method...
Adam Machanic
Pro SQL Server 2005, available now
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=457
--
"ChrisR" <ChrisR@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:427310C9-210E-4A9F-A893-F8AE89A60E94@.microsoft.com...
> sql2k
> Im comparing a username/ password to an App role/ password and Im just not
> seeing the logic here. An App either needs to supply a username/ password
> or
> a "sp_setapprole @.rolename = 'TestRole' ,@.password ='test'". Either way
> they
> are granted access to the DB. Either way they can only execute what I
> allow
> them too(A user cant run a SELECT if I dont grant him access.). How is
> this
> any safer?
> TIA, ChrisR|||Users do not have the password of the application role, only the application
has it.
One example is, users can have write access only thru the application role
but not using their Windows account. If they run the application they can
change data. If they use other tools like Query Analyzer or Access they would
not have write permissions.
Ben Nevarez, MCDBA, OCP
Database Administrator
"ChrisR" wrote:
> sql2k
> Im comparing a username/ password to an App role/ password and Im just not
> seeing the logic here. An App either needs to supply a username/ password or
> a "sp_setapprole @.rolename = 'TestRole' ,@.password ='test'". Either way they
> are granted access to the DB. Either way they can only execute what I allow
> them too(A user cant run a SELECT if I dont grant him access.). How is this
> any safer?
> TIA, ChrisR