Finding collation in 7.0

Hi all,
I am trying to upgrade to SQL 2000 and was instructed by a consultant to
make sure to use the same collation\sort order in 2000 that I have been
using in 7.0. He assured me that this necessary for Great Plains, which is
the only system we have on top of the DB. I am sure it's in the master db,
but I can't find it!
Any help?Andrew,
sp_helpsort
--
Dinesh.
SQL Server FAQ at
http://www.tkdinesh.com
"S" <andrewgbl@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uiZbMmdZDHA.2588@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hi all,
> I am trying to upgrade to SQL 2000 and was instructed by a consultant to
> make sure to use the same collation\sort order in 2000 that I have been
> using in 7.0. He assured me that this necessary for Great Plains, which
is
> the only system we have on top of the DB. I am sure it's in the master
db,
> but I can't find it!
> Any help?
>
>

Find the Stored procedure

Hello,
Our SQL machine is getting bogged down by some sort of stored procedure
and I am trying to find which one. My SQLdiagnostic software (by Idera)
that monitors our SQL server, says that these commands are executing
and taking upwards of 30 minutes to run. This is new and unexpected.

The commands are:

exec sp_executesql @.Pm0 = 0x683AAD4E8159A84C90B65216A4DA25DE, @.Pm1 =
25, @.Pm2 = 2, @.Pm3 = 1
exec sp_executesql @.Pm0 = 0x683AAD4E8159A84C90B65216A4DA25DE, @.Pm1 =
105, @.Pm2 = 2, @.Pm3 = 1
exec sp_executesql @.Pm0 = 0x683AAD4E8159A84C90B65216A4DA25DE, @.Pm1 =
57, @.Pm2 = 2, @.Pm3 = 1

I am getting pages of these and yesterday the are taking upto 30
minutes to run (currently they are taking 1-2 minutes to complete w/o
people on the machine).

We are not getting much help from our software vendor (of our
admissions software, not Idera) on this matter. I have sa access to the
SQL machine and I can see the pages and pages of stored procedures, but
I don't know what the above is running. I want to find the stored
procedure that keeps getting executed. Is the @.Pm0 = an encrypted
entry?

Any advice I would appreciate.
Thanks
Rob Camardarcamarda wrote:
> Hello,
> Our SQL machine is getting bogged down by some sort of stored procedure
> and I am trying to find which one. My SQLdiagnostic software (by Idera)
> that monitors our SQL server, says that these commands are executing
> and taking upwards of 30 minutes to run. This is new and unexpected.
> The commands are:
> exec sp_executesql @.Pm0 = 0x683AAD4E8159A84C90B65216A4DA25DE, @.Pm1 =
> 25, @.Pm2 = 2, @.Pm3 = 1
> exec sp_executesql @.Pm0 = 0x683AAD4E8159A84C90B65216A4DA25DE, @.Pm1 =
> 105, @.Pm2 = 2, @.Pm3 = 1
> exec sp_executesql @.Pm0 = 0x683AAD4E8159A84C90B65216A4DA25DE, @.Pm1 =
> 57, @.Pm2 = 2, @.Pm3 = 1
> I am getting pages of these and yesterday the are taking upto 30
> minutes to run (currently they are taking 1-2 minutes to complete w/o
> people on the machine).
> We are not getting much help from our software vendor (of our
> admissions software, not Idera) on this matter. I have sa access to the
> SQL machine and I can see the pages and pages of stored procedures, but
> I don't know what the above is running. I want to find the stored
> procedure that keeps getting executed. Is the @.Pm0 = an encrypted
> entry?
> Any advice I would appreciate.
> Thanks
> Rob Camarda

The replies to this post suggest that the call may be coming from the
..NET SqlClient, although it seems strange that you don't see the actual
command parameter passed to sp_executesql:

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/mi...91b9670a?hl=en&

But beyond that I have absolutely no idea - you might try posting in
microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet to see if anyone can give you a
clue on how to investigate further.

Simon|||Hi

sp_executesql is documented in BOL the first parameter is a Unicode string
to be executed. you may want to run SQL profiler to find out what the
commands are.

John

"rcamarda" <rcamarda@.cablespeed.com> wrote in message
news:1126614746.141363.266270@.f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
> Hello,
> Our SQL machine is getting bogged down by some sort of stored procedure
> and I am trying to find which one. My SQLdiagnostic software (by Idera)
> that monitors our SQL server, says that these commands are executing
> and taking upwards of 30 minutes to run. This is new and unexpected.
> The commands are:
> exec sp_executesql @.Pm0 = 0x683AAD4E8159A84C90B65216A4DA25DE, @.Pm1 =
> 25, @.Pm2 = 2, @.Pm3 = 1
> exec sp_executesql @.Pm0 = 0x683AAD4E8159A84C90B65216A4DA25DE, @.Pm1 =
> 105, @.Pm2 = 2, @.Pm3 = 1
> exec sp_executesql @.Pm0 = 0x683AAD4E8159A84C90B65216A4DA25DE, @.Pm1 =
> 57, @.Pm2 = 2, @.Pm3 = 1
> I am getting pages of these and yesterday the are taking upto 30
> minutes to run (currently they are taking 1-2 minutes to complete w/o
> people on the machine).
> We are not getting much help from our software vendor (of our
> admissions software, not Idera) on this matter. I have sa access to the
> SQL machine and I can see the pages and pages of stored procedures, but
> I don't know what the above is running. I want to find the stored
> procedure that keeps getting executed. Is the @.Pm0 = an encrypted
> entry?
> Any advice I would appreciate.
> Thanks
> Rob Camardasql

Filtering values in ResultSet by setting range on complex index

Hi!
I have table with complex index on 5 fields. One of them is string filed. I want to implement some sort of filtering, by setting SetRange() in my SQLCeCommand. But i need to fileter only by one string field and to get the values starting with the input string value.
I tried to use such code:
...
command.SetRange(DbRangeOptions.Prefix, new object[] {null, null, null, "Com", null}, null);
resultSet = cmd.ExecuteResultSet(ResultSetOptions.Scrollable);
....
But it doesn't work. As a result i've got an empty result set.
Usage of simple index on one field and setting the correspondent range will solve problem, but i can't have such index due to project restrictions.
Is there any way to set prefix range only by one value of complex index? If not, please, explain me how does Prefix Range works.

Thanx

If filtering has the same behavior as seeking (which I am assuming - read: not tested) then you might want to consider putting the column with the non-null value as the first in the index. This will require that you recreate the index with the new column order.