Question on View Report Click

Hi,
In my report, i get the data from stored procedure. Now the parameter that
i passed to the stored proc through the report has default values in that
already. When user clicks on the report name, it gets the data and
displays. I do not want the report to post and get the data automatically,
i want user to click the View Reprot Button in order to display report.
Since i have default values already filled out, some reason report executes
as soon as you click on the report name.
Any help
thanksThis behavior cannot be modified. If you supply a default value for all
parameters the report will execute automatically.
The easiest workaround is to not supply a default value for one parameter. A
request to change this behavior is already on the feature wishlist.
--
Bruce Johnson [MSFT]
Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Mayur Patel" <mayurworld@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e2IsflVrEHA.2184@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> In my report, i get the data from stored procedure. Now the parameter
> that i passed to the stored proc through the report has default values in
> that already. When user clicks on the report name, it gets the data and
> displays. I do not want the report to post and get the data
> automatically, i want user to click the View Reprot Button in order to
> display report. Since i have default values already filled out, some
> reason report executes as soon as you click on the report name.
> Any help
> thanks
>
>|||I posted a similar question to this earlier today, and found this post.
This information does not appear to be correct. For example, I have a
report with the following parameters and settings:
Parameter Type Has Default Default Value Null Prompt User Prompt String
P1 String Y NONE N
P1:
P2 String Y Query Based Y
P2:
P3 String N Y
P3:
P4 String Y Y
P4:
P5 String Y N
P5:
P6 String Y N
P6:
These are the settings on report server, they aren't necessarily consistent
with the saved report (another annoyance :)), however, when I select Parm 3,
which is a dropdown list, and is the only parm that doesn't have a default,
the report DOES NOT automatically run. This is not consistent with the
behavior I've seen in other places, where when I select the company, the
report does run. So, something is preventing this report from running after
Parm 3 is selected. It won't run until I hit the 'View Report' button.
That's the behavior that I want and expect, the question is how to duplicate
that behavior. I don't want to change any of these settings at this point,
for fear I'll lose the desired behavior, because I don't know what's causing
it.
"Bruce Johnson [MSFT]" wrote:
> This behavior cannot be modified. If you supply a default value for all
> parameters the report will execute automatically.
> The easiest workaround is to not supply a default value for one parameter. A
> request to change this behavior is already on the feature wishlist.
> --
> Bruce Johnson [MSFT]
> Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
>
> "Mayur Patel" <mayurworld@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:e2IsflVrEHA.2184@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > Hi,
> > In my report, i get the data from stored procedure. Now the parameter
> > that i passed to the stored proc through the report has default values in
> > that already. When user clicks on the report name, it gets the data and
> > displays. I do not want the report to post and get the data
> > automatically, i want user to click the View Reprot Button in order to
> > display report. Since i have default values already filled out, some
> > reason report executes as soon as you click on the report name.
> > Any help
> >
> > thanks
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Question on ProcCache

Hi,
DBCC PROCCACHE is giving me that info. How can i know if
the ProcCache is FULL or closed to be ? Can it become
FULL ?
How does it effect Proc performance or general performance?
num proc buffs num proc buffs used num proc buffs active
proc cache size proc cache used proc cache active
-- -- -- --
-- -- --
16642 16642 10492
11736 11736 5586
Thanks !
Don
Have you looked at the documentation on DBCC PROCCACHE? You can find this
in Books Online or, if you don't have it installed:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en..._dbcc_61d1.asp
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)
"Don" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:295fe01c46524$2f422ab0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> DBCC PROCCACHE is giving me that info. How can i know if
> the ProcCache is FULL or closed to be ? Can it become
> FULL ?
> How does it effect Proc performance or general performance?
> num proc buffs num proc buffs used num proc buffs active
> proc cache size proc cache used proc cache active
> -- -- -- --
> -- -- --
> 16642 16642 10492
> 11736 11736 5586
> Thanks !
> Don
>
|||... and also refer to Memory Architecture & Memory pool for more information under BOL.
"Aaron [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:

> Have you looked at the documentation on DBCC PROCCACHE? You can find this
> in Books Online or, if you don't have it installed:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en..._dbcc_61d1.asp
> --
> http://www.aspfaq.com/
> (Reverse address to reply.)
>
>
> "Don" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:295fe01c46524$2f422ab0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
>
>
|||Performance will typically not be affected as the Lazywriter will be
flushing out aged pages. Pls read Books Online Memory architecture and
Lazywriter for more details.
Thanks,
Vikram Jayaram
Microsoft, SQL Server
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Subscribe to MSDN & use http://msdn.microsoft.com/newsgroups.

Question on ProcCache

Hi,
DBCC PROCCACHE is giving me that info. How can i know if
the ProcCache is FULL or closed to be ? Can it become
FULL ?
How does it effect Proc performance or general performance?
num proc buffs num proc buffs used num proc buffs active
proc cache size proc cache used proc cache active
-- -- -- --
-- -- --
16642 16642 10492
11736 11736 5586
Thanks !
DonHave you looked at the documentation on DBCC PROCCACHE? You can find this
in Books Online or, if you don't have it installed:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/tsqlref/ts_dbcc_61d1.asp
--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)
"Don" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:295fe01c46524$2f422ab0$a401280a@.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> DBCC PROCCACHE is giving me that info. How can i know if
> the ProcCache is FULL or closed to be ? Can it become
> FULL ?
> How does it effect Proc performance or general performance?
> num proc buffs num proc buffs used num proc buffs active
> proc cache size proc cache used proc cache active
> -- -- -- --
> -- -- --
> 16642 16642 10492
> 11736 11736 5586
> Thanks !
> Don
>|||Performance will typically not be affected as the Lazywriter will be
flushing out aged pages. Pls read Books Online Memory architecture and
Lazywriter for more details.
Thanks,
Vikram Jayaram
Microsoft, SQL Server
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Subscribe to MSDN & use http://msdn.microsoft.com/newsgroups.

Question on ProcCache

Hi,
DBCC PROCCACHE is giving me that info. How can i know if
the ProcCache is FULL or closed to be ? Can it become
FULL ?
How does it effect Proc performance or general performance?
num proc buffs num proc buffs used num proc buffs active
proc cache size proc cache used proc cache active
-- -- -- --
-- -- --
16642 16642 10492
11736 11736 5586
Thanks !
DonHave you looked at the documentation on DBCC PROCCACHE? You can find this
in Books Online or, if you don't have it installed:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/e...s_dbcc_61d1.asp
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)
"Don" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:295fe01c46524$2f422ab0$a401280a@.phx
.gbl...
> Hi,
> DBCC PROCCACHE is giving me that info. How can i know if
> the ProcCache is FULL or closed to be ? Can it become
> FULL ?
> How does it effect Proc performance or general performance?
> num proc buffs num proc buffs used num proc buffs active
> proc cache size proc cache used proc cache active
> -- -- -- --
> -- -- --
> 16642 16642 10492
> 11736 11736 5586
> Thanks !
> Don
>|||... and also refer to Memory Architecture & Memory pool for more informatio
n under BOL.
"Aaron [SQL Server MVP]" wrote:

> Have you looked at the documentation on DBCC PROCCACHE? You can find this
> in Books Online or, if you don't have it installed:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/e...s_dbcc_61d1.asp
> --
> http://www.aspfaq.com/
> (Reverse address to reply.)
>
>
> "Don" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:295fe01c46524$2f422ab0$a401280a@.phx
.gbl...
>
>|||Performance will typically not be affected as the Lazywriter will be
flushing out aged pages. Pls read Books Online Memory architecture and
Lazywriter for more details.
Thanks,
Vikram Jayaram
Microsoft, SQL Server
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Subscribe to MSDN & use http://msdn.microsoft.com/newsgroups.

Question on Indexes...errr, indices...

Hey all,
Lets say I have stored proc "x" and "x" pulls it's data from a certain
table. However, on that table there are 3 indices and each index
contains the field specified in "x"s WHERE clause.
How does SQL Server decide which query to use? IOW, I guess my root
question is, what is the best way to design indices to get maximum
efficiency?SQL Server looks at a variety of factors, including index statistics, what
columns are present in the index other than the key column (i.e. if the
index "covers" the query), and various other factors. There are lots of
good articles at http://www.sql-server-performance.com on this and related
topics.
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.sqljunkies.com/weblog/amachanic
--
<roy.anderson@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1108562342.303000.70650@.l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Hey all,
> Lets say I have stored proc "x" and "x" pulls it's data from a certain
> table. However, on that table there are 3 indices and each index
> contains the field specified in "x"s WHERE clause.
> How does SQL Server decide which query to use? IOW, I guess my root
> question is, what is the best way to design indices to get maximum
> efficiency?
>