Question on Value of Probability of value 1 or 2 in Neural Network Viewer

Hi, all,

I am confused about the value of Probability of Value 1 or 2 (on a particular attribute value) in Neural Network viewer. E.g. the value of Probability of value 1 is actually very low (the same to the value of Probability of value 2), but why the bar which shows the strength of the probability of these two values are still so strong even stronger than other values of probability of value 1 or 2 based on other attribute values which have a much higher probability of value 1 or 2?

And how does the algorithm calculate the Probability of attribute value in nerual network by the way?

Hope my question is clear.

I am looking forward to hearing from you shortly and thanks a lot in advance.

With best regards,

Yours sincerely,

The scores represent the predicted probability as influenced by a single attribute value.

Here is how the scores are computed:

Assume that the model predicts Bike Buyer (= TRUE or FALSE), based on Home Owner, Commute Distance etc.

A stored procedure creates a "virtual" input, containing, for each row, a single attribute (everything else is missing). Example:

Row 1: (empty) -- all attributes are missing

Row 2: Home Owner = TRUE, everything else is empty (missing)

Row 3: Home Owner = FALSE, everything else is empty (missing)

Row 4: Commute Distance= 0-2 miles, everything else is empty (missing)

Row 5: Commute Distance= 2-4 miles, everything else is empty (missing)

and so on.

For each row in this "virtual" input, the procedure computes PredictProbability(BikeBuyer, 'TRUE') and PredictProbability(BikeBuyer, 'FALSE') as well as Predict(BikeBuyer)

All the results that favor TRUE are then normalized in the 0-100 space

Same for all the results that favor FALSE

So, practically, the Probability of Value 1(or 2) represents a normalized view of the prediction probability for value 1 generated by that input.

Because of the normalization, inputs that predict strongly a value may still have low scores (simply because all other inputs are stronger)

Hope this helps

|||

Hi,

Thanks for that.

With best regards,

sql

question on tasks

hi,

if a package fails on error, would i be able to know code wise which particular task failed?
also, if the task is using a connection manager, how will i be able to access that particular connection object?

If you turn on logging then you will know what failed. Does that not suffice?

-Jamie

|||

i'm not sure if this answers you questions, however...

you could execute the package programatically and trap for a DtsTaskException that may be generated. then, you can determine which task caused the error by checking the subcomponent property of the dtserror object.

i believe that you should already know which connection manager a task uses because (as far as i know) this property cannot be set dynamically.

|||

if a task fails, i want to be able to do this PROGRAMMATICALLY on error event:

1. know which task failed and get the connection object used by the task, if any.
2. so that i will try to establish connection to the connection object and
3. reexecute the task if #2 is successful.

please let me know how to do this.

thanks.

|||

Ranier wrote:

if a task fails, i want to be able to do this PROGRAMMATICALLY on error event:

1. know which task failed and get the connection object used by the task, if any.
2. so that i will try to establish connection to the connection object and
3. reexecute the task if #2 is successful.

please let me know how to do this.

thanks.

do you really want to do this? why don't you just execute the package within a transaction and then re-execute it if the package fails?|||

Hi Duane,

In essence, I want to do a retry component for every task... is this possible?

|||

Ranier wrote:

Hi Duane,

In essence, I want to do a retry component for every task... is this possible?

it may be possible, but unnecessary.

if i understand you correctly, you want to re-execute a task if it fails. why do you want to do this? wouldn't it make more sense to rollback the entire package if a task fails, and then re-execute it?

|||

the component that i want to make should be on a script task. i need to be able to reuse it on every package just drag and drop.

why do i need to retry? in cases such as intermittent connection or the target server suddenly reboots and becomes back online after a couple of minutes, i would want the script task to retry the task that failed programmatically and without human intervention.

|||

Ranier wrote:

why do i need to retry? in cases such as intermittent connection or the target server suddenly reboots and becomes back online after a couple of minutes, i would want the script task to retry the task that failed programmatically and without human intervention.

wouldn't it make more sense to rollback the entire package if a task fails, and then re-execute it? you can use transactions and checkpoints to accomplish this.

Question on SQL Update behaviour

I have a question on how SQL Server updates records. Say assuming if I have
a table with 50000 records.. and i need to update a particular field C in
this table, based on field A and field B on the same table. I can either
write a set based SP or a cursor based SP to do that.
If I update it using cursors, I can see the records being updated 1 by 1. If
I update the whole thing using a set based SP, am I right to say that I will
not see any records updated till the process is over? Does SQL Server does
the transaction commitment itself if I write it using the set-based
approach?
Thanks.
Hi,
Update with set will do a batch updat based on the condition you are gving
in the where clause. So until the transaction is commited
you will not be able to see change. Where as Cursor does a row by row
operation. So after each record update you could see the
change.
Have a look into ISOLATION LEVEL topic in books online.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Nestor" <n3570r@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:uncViVfgFHA.2904@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>I have a question on how SQL Server updates records. Say assuming if I have
>a table with 50000 records.. and i need to update a particular field C in
>this table, based on field A and field B on the same table. I can either
>write a set based SP or a cursor based SP to do that.
> If I update it using cursors, I can see the records being updated 1 by 1.
> If I update the whole thing using a set based SP, am I right to say that I
> will not see any records updated till the process is over? Does SQL Server
> does the transaction commitment itself if I write it using the set-based
> approach?
> Thanks.
>
|||thanks for the prompt response... i'm really curious about how the table
will be locked up since i'm updating the table based on conditions from
fields that are in the same table as well...
will cursors work better in this case than batch insert due to the lockups?
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uGQThcfgFHA.576@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> Update with set will do a batch updat based on the condition you are gving
> in the where clause. So until the transaction is commited
> you will not be able to see change. Where as Cursor does a row by row
> operation. So after each record update you could see the
> change.
> Have a look into ISOLATION LEVEL topic in books online.
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
> "Nestor" <n3570r@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:uncViVfgFHA.2904@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>
|||you can actually see the changes taking place by running a query with the
table hint nolock as in: select count(*) from mytable with (nolock) where...
I use this approach at times to see how far in a large insert or update is so
I can calculate how much longer the statement will take.
regards,
Mark Baekdal
http://www.dbghost.com
http://www.innovartis.co.uk
+44 (0)208 241 1762
Build, Comparison and Synchronization from Source Control = Database change
management for SQL Server
"Nestor" wrote:

> thanks for the prompt response... i'm really curious about how the table
> will be locked up since i'm updating the table based on conditions from
> fields that are in the same table as well...
> will cursors work better in this case than batch insert due to the lockups?
>
>
> "Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uGQThcfgFHA.576@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
>

Question on SQL Update behaviour

I have a question on how SQL Server updates records. Say assuming if I have
a table with 50000 records.. and i need to update a particular field C in
this table, based on field A and field B on the same table. I can either
write a set based SP or a cursor based SP to do that.
If I update it using cursors, I can see the records being updated 1 by 1. If
I update the whole thing using a set based SP, am I right to say that I will
not see any records updated till the process is over? Does SQL Server does
the transaction commitment itself if I write it using the set-based
approach?
Thanks.Hi,
Update with set will do a batch updat based on the condition you are gving
in the where clause. So until the transaction is commited
you will not be able to see change. Where as Cursor does a row by row
operation. So after each record update you could see the
change.
Have a look into ISOLATION LEVEL topic in books online.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Nestor" <n3570r@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:uncViVfgFHA.2904@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>I have a question on how SQL Server updates records. Say assuming if I have
>a table with 50000 records.. and i need to update a particular field C in
>this table, based on field A and field B on the same table. I can either
>write a set based SP or a cursor based SP to do that.
> If I update it using cursors, I can see the records being updated 1 by 1.
> If I update the whole thing using a set based SP, am I right to say that I
> will not see any records updated till the process is over? Does SQL Server
> does the transaction commitment itself if I write it using the set-based
> approach?
> Thanks.
>|||thanks for the prompt response... i'm really curious about how the table
will be locked up since i'm updating the table based on conditions from
fields that are in the same table as well...
will cursors work better in this case than batch insert due to the lockups?
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uGQThcfgFHA.576@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> Update with set will do a batch updat based on the condition you are gving
> in the where clause. So until the transaction is commited
> you will not be able to see change. Where as Cursor does a row by row
> operation. So after each record update you could see the
> change.
> Have a look into ISOLATION LEVEL topic in books online.
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
> "Nestor" <n3570r@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:uncViVfgFHA.2904@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>|||you can actually see the changes taking place by running a query with the
table hint nolock as in: select count(*) from mytable with (nolock) where...
I use this approach at times to see how far in a large insert or update is s
o
I can calculate how much longer the statement will take.
regards,
Mark Baekdal
http://www.dbghost.com
http://www.innovartis.co.uk
+44 (0)208 241 1762
Build, Comparison and Synchronization from Source Control = Database change
management for SQL Server
"Nestor" wrote:

> thanks for the prompt response... i'm really curious about how the table
> will be locked up since i'm updating the table based on conditions from
> fields that are in the same table as well...
> will cursors work better in this case than batch insert due to the lockups
?
>
>
> "Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uGQThcfgFHA.576@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
>

Question on SQL Update behaviour

I have a question on how SQL Server updates records. Say assuming if I have
a table with 50000 records.. and i need to update a particular field C in
this table, based on field A and field B on the same table. I can either
write a set based SP or a cursor based SP to do that.
If I update it using cursors, I can see the records being updated 1 by 1. If
I update the whole thing using a set based SP, am I right to say that I will
not see any records updated till the process is over? Does SQL Server does
the transaction commitment itself if I write it using the set-based
approach?
Thanks.Hi,
Update with set will do a batch updat based on the condition you are gving
in the where clause. So until the transaction is commited
you will not be able to see change. Where as Cursor does a row by row
operation. So after each record update you could see the
change.
Have a look into ISOLATION LEVEL topic in books online.
Thanks
Hari
SQL Server MVP
"Nestor" <n3570r@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:uncViVfgFHA.2904@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>I have a question on how SQL Server updates records. Say assuming if I have
>a table with 50000 records.. and i need to update a particular field C in
>this table, based on field A and field B on the same table. I can either
>write a set based SP or a cursor based SP to do that.
> If I update it using cursors, I can see the records being updated 1 by 1.
> If I update the whole thing using a set based SP, am I right to say that I
> will not see any records updated till the process is over? Does SQL Server
> does the transaction commitment itself if I write it using the set-based
> approach?
> Thanks.
>|||thanks for the prompt response... i'm really curious about how the table
will be locked up since i'm updating the table based on conditions from
fields that are in the same table as well...
will cursors work better in this case than batch insert due to the lockups?
"Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uGQThcfgFHA.576@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> Update with set will do a batch updat based on the condition you are gving
> in the where clause. So until the transaction is commited
> you will not be able to see change. Where as Cursor does a row by row
> operation. So after each record update you could see the
> change.
> Have a look into ISOLATION LEVEL topic in books online.
> Thanks
> Hari
> SQL Server MVP
> "Nestor" <n3570r@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:uncViVfgFHA.2904@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>>I have a question on how SQL Server updates records. Say assuming if I
>>have a table with 50000 records.. and i need to update a particular field
>>C in this table, based on field A and field B on the same table. I can
>>either write a set based SP or a cursor based SP to do that.
>> If I update it using cursors, I can see the records being updated 1 by 1.
>> If I update the whole thing using a set based SP, am I right to say that
>> I will not see any records updated till the process is over? Does SQL
>> Server does the transaction commitment itself if I write it using the
>> set-based approach?
>> Thanks.
>|||you can actually see the changes taking place by running a query with the
table hint nolock as in: select count(*) from mytable with (nolock) where...
I use this approach at times to see how far in a large insert or update is so
I can calculate how much longer the statement will take.
regards,
Mark Baekdal
http://www.dbghost.com
http://www.innovartis.co.uk
+44 (0)208 241 1762
Build, Comparison and Synchronization from Source Control = Database change
management for SQL Server
"Nestor" wrote:
> thanks for the prompt response... i'm really curious about how the table
> will be locked up since i'm updating the table based on conditions from
> fields that are in the same table as well...
> will cursors work better in this case than batch insert due to the lockups?
>
>
> "Hari Prasad" <hari_prasad_k@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uGQThcfgFHA.576@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> > Hi,
> >
> > Update with set will do a batch updat based on the condition you are gving
> > in the where clause. So until the transaction is commited
> > you will not be able to see change. Where as Cursor does a row by row
> > operation. So after each record update you could see the
> > change.
> >
> > Have a look into ISOLATION LEVEL topic in books online.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Hari
> > SQL Server MVP
> >
> > "Nestor" <n3570r@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:uncViVfgFHA.2904@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> >>I have a question on how SQL Server updates records. Say assuming if I
> >>have a table with 50000 records.. and i need to update a particular field
> >>C in this table, based on field A and field B on the same table. I can
> >>either write a set based SP or a cursor based SP to do that.
> >>
> >> If I update it using cursors, I can see the records being updated 1 by 1.
> >> If I update the whole thing using a set based SP, am I right to say that
> >> I will not see any records updated till the process is over? Does SQL
> >> Server does the transaction commitment itself if I write it using the
> >> set-based approach?
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

Question on particular report region layout properties

Hi, all experts here,

Thanks a lot for your kind attention.

I have been trying to adjust the report regions fit into the whole report page. I could see the width and height property of the whole report page from the report property dialogue, but where can I find the width and height for the particular report region like the table? Then I could accordingly adjust the layout of both the report page and report region like table?

Hope my question is clear for your help.

With best regards,

Yours sincerely,

Clicking on the top left corner of the table object, you can see the properties of the table. There should be a Size property that has width and height.

Hope this is what you're looking for.

cheers,

Andrew

|||

Hi, Andrew,

Thanks a lot for your kind suggestion.

Yes, I clicked on the left corner of the table and the table property dialogue box appeared, but there is no size property there.

Any futher advices? I am looking forward to hearing from you further shortly.

Thanks a lot again.

With best regards,

Yours sincerely,

|||

Did you click twice & hit F4 to see the properties window? That is strange. You can also click anywhere on the report and hit tab to cycle through the controls, or hit F4 to view the properties window and select the table from the drop down list.

cheers,

Andrew

|||

Hi, Andrew,

Thanks a lto for your kind advice.

By all means I could be able to make it work. Jutst wondering a simpler way of doing it.

With best regards,

Yours sincerely,