Showing posts with label design. Show all posts
Showing posts with label design. Show all posts

Monday, March 26, 2012

Enterprise SQL Projects (1000+ Stored Procedures)

Enterprise SQL Projects
--------
When Design is replaced with an Architectural Plan

The following post is intended as a starting point of some main concepts to consider when dealing with ent. sql projects. While it is not a direct question of any kind, it would interest people that are/or was involved in ent. projects and therefore have been troubled with similar problems.

Here is a quick overview of a couple main concepts when you have to deal with a Ent. Projects with 1000+ stored procedures.

DOCUMENTATION:
It is an absolute must to include 100% explanatory code on top of the sps.

FUNCTIONS:
Use functions to the maximum extent to reduce overal stored procedure complexity
a rule of thumb is to have 1 to 10, functions to sps ratio or simmilar.

TRIGGERS:
A lot to say about them that cannot be covered in this context

NAMING CONVENSION:
Your naming convension should be 100% pre-thought and designed, no mistakes allowed in this context as it will cause all stored procedures to be extremely difficult/impossible to browse.

a quick template could look as this:

sp
module name
underscore(_)
action (lower case)
noun (proper case)

For example:
spOrders_putOrderDetail
spMaintainUsers_deactivateUser
spReports_getZeroInventory

(quoted by: tmorton)

my addition to this would be something like:
sp< as a prefix is surtently an overkill when dealing with 1000+ sps and is not needed.

however a lot more complex naming strategies can be used, that will cause the project to be a lot more easy to maintain.Just a note on your last comment - I would also like to submit that I have thought for several years now that prefacing stored procedure names with "sp" and / or table names with "tbl" is completely unnecessary. Back in "the day" this might have been necessary but I don't think I've seen a compelling enough reason in years to continue this practice.

Of course, this is just my opinion.|||Russem:

Personally, it's all about readability and how the programmer feels which coding paradigm is easier for them to read. I personally love the Hungarian naming convention. For example, once you get into huge projects, i.e. > 1M lines of code, it gets more difficult to read the code, so by utilizing these prefixes, it sure helps the eyes (and brain)!|||::Just a note on your last comment - I would also like to submit that I have thought for
::several years now that prefacing stored procedure names with "sp" and / or table names
::with "tbl" is completely unnecessary. Back in "the day" this might have been necessary but
::I don't think I've seen a compelling enough reason in years to continue this practice.

Naturally, though, this "compelling reason" some people seem to see has NOT included going to the documentation.

There you would find out that the official documentation says that whatever you name a stored procedure, you do NOT start it with "sp_".

Because contrary to what people that have not read the documentation do think, this means "System Procedure" (not Stored Procedure).

And it DOES make a difference. Let me quote:

::It is strongly recommended that you do not create any stored procedures using sp_ as a
::prefix. SQL Server always looks for a stored procedure beginning with sp_ in this order:
::
::The stored procedure in the master database.
::
::The stored procedure based on any qualifiers provided (database name or owner).
::
::The stored procedure using dbo as the owner, if one is not specified.
::
::Therefore, although the user-created stored procedure prefixed with sp_ may exist in the
::current database, the master database is always checked first, even if the stored
::procedure is qualified with the database name.
::
::Important If any user-created stored procedure has the same name as a system stored
::procedure, the user-created stored procedure will never be executed.

Prefx if you want, but people following this should have the dignitiy to read the documentation.

Funnily, a lot of "sql gurus" in companies just prefix all "stored procedures" with "sp_" as this is "how ms does it, too".|||I'll prefix variables, sure. But I won't do it with stored procedures (and a standard prefix for all of them) and especially not with tables. I definitely agree with adding a prefix to variable names, though :)

Thursday, March 22, 2012

Enterprise Mgr - alter table fails

My developers just started having this problem a few weeks ago. Nearly
any type of "design" table changes are failing in Enterprise Mgr. This
only seems to be happening on the servers running Enterprise Edition.
Standard Edition and MSDE do not have the problem.
All are running SQL2000 - SP4. Some servers are Win2000 Server SP4 and
others are Win2003 Server - SP4. The Windows version does not seem to
matter. I am not aware of any maintenace applied to the SQL servers,
but all workstations have recently had automatic updates turned on and
have received some updates.
Here is the most common example. The developer needs to change the
length of a field in a table. They use Enterprise Mgr, right click on
the table and select "design". They make their change and when they
hit save, they get the following error. (There is no data in the
table.)
'prob1' table
- Unable to create index 'PK_prob1'.
ODBC error: MicrosoftODBC SQL Server DriverSQL ServerTable 'prob1'
already has a primary key defined on it.
MicrosoftODBC SQL Server DriverSQL ServerCould not create constraint.
See previous errors.
I can not just tell them to switch over and use Query Analyzer. Some
of these people have little or no SQL knowledge and would never make it
through alter table statements. They build tables for their front page
apps and that's as far as they get into SQL.
Any thoughts would be helpful. I've scoured support and newsgroups and
can only find old 6.5 and 7.0 reports. I've included the DDL to create
the table if needed. I get the error just changing F2 from 20 to 25
for example.
if exists (select * from dbo.sysobjects where id =
object_id(N'dbo.prob1') and OBJECTPROPERTY(id, N'IsUserTable') = 1)
drop table dbo.prob1
GO
CREATE TABLE dbo.prob1 (
f1 char (10) NOT NULL ,
f2 char (20) NULL ,
f3 char (30) NULL
) ON PRIMARY
GO
ALTER TABLE dbo.prob1 ADD
CONSTRAINT PK_prob1 PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED
(
f1
) ON PRIMARY
GO
Hi,
Just a small thought..
As you have applied SP4 to your SQL Servers, have you applied SP4 to all of
the development machines where the client tools (EM, QA) are installed, too?
Robert
<stephanie.harrell@.stateauto.com> wrote in message
news:1142271519.219796.202000@.i40g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> My developers just started having this problem a few weeks ago. Nearly
> any type of "design" table changes are failing in Enterprise Mgr. This
> only seems to be happening on the servers running Enterprise Edition.
> Standard Edition and MSDE do not have the problem.
> All are running SQL2000 - SP4. Some servers are Win2000 Server SP4 and
> others are Win2003 Server - SP4. The Windows version does not seem to
> matter. I am not aware of any maintenace applied to the SQL servers,
> but all workstations have recently had automatic updates turned on and
> have received some updates.
> Here is the most common example. The developer needs to change the
> length of a field in a table. They use Enterprise Mgr, right click on
> the table and select "design". They make their change and when they
> hit save, they get the following error. (There is no data in the
> table.)
> 'prob1' table
> - Unable to create index 'PK_prob1'.
> ODBC error: MicrosoftODBC SQL Server DriverSQL ServerTable 'prob1'
> already has a primary key defined on it.
> MicrosoftODBC SQL Server DriverSQL ServerCould not create constraint.
> See previous errors.
>
> I can not just tell them to switch over and use Query Analyzer. Some
> of these people have little or no SQL knowledge and would never make it
> through alter table statements. They build tables for their front page
> apps and that's as far as they get into SQL.
> Any thoughts would be helpful. I've scoured support and newsgroups and
> can only find old 6.5 and 7.0 reports. I've included the DDL to create
> the table if needed. I get the error just changing F2 from 20 to 25
> for example.
>
> if exists (select * from dbo.sysobjects where id =
> object_id(N'dbo.prob1') and OBJECTPROPERTY(id, N'IsUserTable') = 1)
> drop table dbo.prob1
> GO
> CREATE TABLE dbo.prob1 (
> f1 char (10) NOT NULL ,
> f2 char (20) NULL ,
> f3 char (30) NULL
> ) ON PRIMARY
> GO
> ALTER TABLE dbo.prob1 ADD
> CONSTRAINT PK_prob1 PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED
> (
> f1
> ) ON PRIMARY
> GO
>
|||Yes, all servers have SP4. As for client tools, I would say the
majority are. There may be a couple older machines that are not
current, but have not heard from any of those people - if there are any.
|||(stephanie.harrell@.stateauto.com) writes:
> Here is the most common example. The developer needs to change the
> length of a field in a table. They use Enterprise Mgr, right click on
> the table and select "design". They make their change and when they
> hit save, they get the following error. (There is no data in the
> table.)
> 'prob1' table
> - Unable to create index 'PK_prob1'.
> ODBC error: MicrosoftODBC SQL Server DriverSQL ServerTable 'prob1'
> already has a primary key defined on it.
> MicrosoftODBC SQL Server DriverSQL ServerCould not create constraint.
> See previous errors.
>
> I can not just tell them to switch over and use Query Analyzer. Some
> of these people have little or no SQL knowledge and would never make it
> through alter table statements. They build tables for their front page
> apps and that's as far as they get into SQL.
To be very blunt, if they can't write change scripts with ALTER TABLE,
they should not be changing tables at all. Performing changes to tables
is an advanced operation, and requires careful understanding, particularly
if you are to do it in a production environment.
The Design Table function in EM has several serious flaws (and all these
flaws are carried over to SQL 2005). I include a list below, from a post
that I made just the other day.
I was not able to reproduce the problem with the table you posted. But
you could get an idea of what's going by requesting getting a change
script from EM. (Which you should do anyway, because of all the bugs
in the Table Designer.) You find this function on the 3rd button from
the left in the toolbar.
Here is a list of know defenciencies with the Table Designer:
1) The transaction scope is wacko. What should be one transaction is
split up into several, which can lead to a table change being only
partly implemented, and your database becomes a mess. Or you just lose
constraints, without knowing it.
2) In the generated script, the transaction spans multiple batches. This
means that if one batch fails with a batch-aborting error, the
transaction is rolled back. The remaining batches in the script are
still carried out which is not likely what you want. (This flaw does
not appear if you save directly, as the Table Designer does not continue
to submit batches if there is an error.)
3) The table designer essentially behaves as there has been no later
version of SQL Server. That is, in many cases where it could use
ALTER TABLE, it instead runs a script where it creates a new table
and copies data over.
4) Say that you have to tables A and B. B has an FK to A. You first make a
change to B, and generate a script. Then you change your mind, and
close without saving anything. Instead you make a change A. When you
generate script (or even worse just press Save), you find that the
change to B is included.
5) All constraints that are reapplied, are reapplied WITH NOCHECK,
which means that they are not trusted as far as the optimizer is
concerned. This have serious impact on performance, not the least
with partitioned views.
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...ons/books.mspx
|||Thank you for your reply and you are certainly entitled to your opinion
on who should change tables. Our set up works for us. We support a
large audience of developers at varying levels of expertise and this is
the first time we've encountered any problems with the tool. I will
pass along your suggestion on generating the change script to our
developers.
|||(stephanie.harrell@.stateauto.com) writes:
> Thank you for your reply and you are certainly entitled to your opinion
> on who should change tables. Our set up works for us. We support a
> large audience of developers at varying levels of expertise and this is
> the first time we've encountered any problems with the tool.
That you know of. Some of the problems that I pointed out are of the
kind that you may not notice directly when they cause problems. If you
lose an FK constraint, you may not notice until years later when you find
some junk in the column.
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...ons/books.mspx
|||I thought I would let you know that I found the problem. The
XACT_ABORT option had been turned on server-wide. The new tools with
SQL 2005 allow you to turn that option off/on in the server properties
and someone had turned it on. Once I turned it back off, Enterprise
Manager worked like a champ again. Guess this is why we have
development servers - to learn lessons the hard way.
Thanks all!
Erland Sommarskog wrote:
> (stephanie.harrell@.stateauto.com) writes:
> That you know of. Some of the problems that I pointed out are of the
> kind that you may not notice directly when they cause problems. If you
> lose an FK constraint, you may not notice until years later when you find
> some junk in the column.
>
>
> --
> Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
> Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ads/books.mspx
> Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...ons/books.mspx

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Enterprise manager taking up to 10 minutes to save design changes

Hi,
I am running SQL 2000 with an 8 GB database. I have two relatively large
tables (each with about 2 million records in them), and I occasionally need
to make changes to the table design (add a column, increase the size of an
existing field, etc.) on these two tables through the Enterprise Manager.
However, saving these changes can take betwen 5-10 minutes to complete.
If I make changes to any of my other smaller tables, they are saved
instantly. Is it really supposed to take this long for larger tables to be
updated?
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Never make a change to a production db with EM. Most of the time it will
create a temp table, copy all the data over from the original, drop the
original and then rename the temp table to the original name. Most of the
time a simple ALTER TABLE is all you need to issue. If it is something
simple like increasing a varchar column it might just be a meta data change.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Stu" <Stu@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BACB0B6C-FDA2-439A-BFA5-A5672AE7AE21@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I am running SQL 2000 with an 8 GB database. I have two relatively large
> tables (each with about 2 million records in them), and I occasionally
> need
> to make changes to the table design (add a column, increase the size of an
> existing field, etc.) on these two tables through the Enterprise Manager.
> However, saving these changes can take betwen 5-10 minutes to complete.
> If I make changes to any of my other smaller tables, they are saved
> instantly. Is it really supposed to take this long for larger tables to
> be
> updated?
> Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Enterprise manager taking up to 10 minutes to save design changes

Hi,
I am running SQL 2000 with an 8 GB database. I have two relatively large
tables (each with about 2 million records in them), and I occasionally need
to make changes to the table design (add a column, increase the size of an
existing field, etc.) on these two tables through the Enterprise Manager.
However, saving these changes can take betwen 5-10 minutes to complete.
If I make changes to any of my other smaller tables, they are saved
instantly. Is it really supposed to take this long for larger tables to be
updated?
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.Never make a change to a production db with EM. Most of the time it will
create a temp table, copy all the data over from the original, drop the
original and then rename the temp table to the original name. Most of the
time a simple ALTER TABLE is all you need to issue. If it is something
simple like increasing a varchar column it might just be a meta data change.
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Stu" <Stu@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BACB0B6C-FDA2-439A-BFA5-A5672AE7AE21@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I am running SQL 2000 with an 8 GB database. I have two relatively large
> tables (each with about 2 million records in them), and I occasionally
> need
> to make changes to the table design (add a column, increase the size of an
> existing field, etc.) on these two tables through the Enterprise Manager.
> However, saving these changes can take betwen 5-10 minutes to complete.
> If I make changes to any of my other smaller tables, they are saved
> instantly. Is it really supposed to take this long for larger tables to
> be
> updated?
> Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Enterprise manager taking up to 10 minutes to save design changes

Hi,
I am running SQL 2000 with an 8 GB database. I have two relatively large
tables (each with about 2 million records in them), and I occasionally need
to make changes to the table design (add a column, increase the size of an
existing field, etc.) on these two tables through the Enterprise Manager.
However, saving these changes can take betwen 5-10 minutes to complete.
If I make changes to any of my other smaller tables, they are saved
instantly. Is it really supposed to take this long for larger tables to be
updated?
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.Never make a change to a production db with EM. Most of the time it will
create a temp table, copy all the data over from the original, drop the
original and then rename the temp table to the original name. Most of the
time a simple ALTER TABLE is all you need to issue. If it is something
simple like increasing a varchar column it might just be a meta data change.
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Stu" <Stu@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BACB0B6C-FDA2-439A-BFA5-A5672AE7AE21@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> I am running SQL 2000 with an 8 GB database. I have two relatively large
> tables (each with about 2 million records in them), and I occasionally
> need
> to make changes to the table design (add a column, increase the size of an
> existing field, etc.) on these two tables through the Enterprise Manager.
> However, saving these changes can take betwen 5-10 minutes to complete.
> If I make changes to any of my other smaller tables, they are saved
> instantly. Is it really supposed to take this long for larger tables to
> be
> updated?
> Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.sql

Enterprise manager table design

I have table with more then 100 coluns . I must change default value
from 0 to 1 in 90 columns. Is there a way to do this in "table design"
in "all in once" metod.Hi
I prefer to write a script does the job .Don't forget to drop first
constraints and then re-create with DEFAULT (1)
"nywebmaster" <scgwebmaster@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1131349106.061862.27390@.z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>I have table with more then 100 coluns . I must change default value
> from 0 to 1 in 90 columns. Is there a way to do this in "table design"
> in "all in once" metod.
>|||Hi
To add to Uri's suggestion, you can script the table by right clicking the
table in EM and choose the Generate SQL option. Then when you have the file
it can be edited (possibly in Query Analyser!) where global replacement coul
d
save you time. You can then run the script in Query Analyser or from a
command prompt using OSQL.
If you don't want to loose the data from the table then you may want to copy
the contents into a temporary table and then load them back if you are using
the drop/create method.
John
"nywebmaster" wrote:

> I have table with more then 100 coluns . I must change default value
> from 0 to 1 in 90 columns. Is there a way to do this in "table design"
> in "all in once" metod.
>|||On 6 Nov 2005 23:38:26 -0800, nywebmaster wrote:

>I have table with more then 100 coluns . I must change default value
>from 0 to 1 in 90 columns. Is there a way to do this in "table design"
>in "all in once" metod.
Hi nywebmaster,
This question suggests that you have a repeating group in your table.
That is a sign of a weak design. I'll give you an example:
Weak design:
CREATE TABLE SalesPersons
(SalesPersonID int NOT NULL
SalesPersonName varchar(50) NOT NULL,
SalesJan decimal(9,2) DEFAULT NULL,
SalesFeb decimal(9,2) DEFAULT NULL,
SalesMar decimal(9,2) DEFAULT NULL,
SalesApr decimal(9,2) DEFAULT NULL,
SalesMay decimal(9,2) DEFAULT NULL,
SalesJun decimal(9,2) DEFAULT NULL,
SalesJul decimal(9,2) DEFAULT NULL,
SalesAug decimal(9,2) DEFAULT NULL,
SalesSep decimal(9,2) DEFAULT NULL,
SalesOct decimal(9,2) DEFAULT NULL,
SalesNov decimal(9,2) DEFAULT NULL,
SalesDec decimal(9,2) DEFAULT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (SalesPersonID)
)
Better design:
CREATE TABLE SalesPersons
(SalesPersonID int NOT NULL
SalesPersonName varchar(50) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (SalesPersonID)
)
CREATE TABLE Sales
(SalesPersonID int NOT NULL,
MonthNo tinyint NOT NULL,
Sales decimal(9,2) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (SalesPersonID, MonthNo)
FOREIGN KEY (SalesPersonID)
REFERENCES SalesPersons (SalesPersonID)
CHECK (MonthNo BETWEEN 1 AND 12)
)
Best, Hugo
--
(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)

Enterprise manager table design

I have table with more then 100 columns . I must change default value
from 0 to 1 in 90 columns. Is there a way to do this in "table design"
in "all in once" metod.
Hi
Please don't multipost , I've answered the question in .programming group.
"nywebmaster" <scgwebmaster@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1131349183.821846.143180@.o13g2000cwo.googlegr oups.com...
>I have table with more then 100 columns . I must change default value
> from 0 to 1 in 90 columns. Is there a way to do this in "table design"
> in "all in once" metod.
>

Enterprise manager table design

I have table with more then 100 columns . I must change default value
from 0 to 1 in 90 columns. Is there a way to do this in "table design"
in "all in once" metod.Hi
Please don't multipost , I've answered the question in .programming group.
"nywebmaster" <scgwebmaster@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1131349183.821846.143180@.o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>I have table with more then 100 columns . I must change default value
> from 0 to 1 in 90 columns. Is there a way to do this in "table design"
> in "all in once" metod.
>

Enterprise manager table design

I have table with more then 100 columns . I must change default value
from 0 to 1 in 90 columns. Is there a way to do this in "table design"
in "all in once" metod.Hi
Please don't multipost , I've answered the question in .programming group.
"nywebmaster" <scgwebmaster@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1131349183.821846.143180@.o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>I have table with more then 100 columns . I must change default value
> from 0 to 1 in 90 columns. Is there a way to do this in "table design"
> in "all in once" metod.
>sql

Sunday, March 11, 2012

Enterprise Manager Problem

Hi. I got Enterprise Manager to work finally.
However, the Columns are backwards when I retrieve all rows, and when i go
to design a table.
Meaning to say that the ID starts on right side of screen, and scrollbar is
on left side (everything is backwards)
in options of enterprise manager, it says english is default language.
thanksHi Michael,
Does this problem happen only with the Enterprise Manager or you see the
same behavior with , say Query Analyzer:
select * from pubs..authors where 1=2
How does the column order appear in the result window of this query ?
This may be more likely a language specific issue and I have seen certain
non-English languages (Arabic etc) which lay out the columns from
left-to-right.
So, you may want to review the configuration on the system, and spcifically
look for non-english related language choices during installation (both OS
and SQL related)
Hope this helps,
Ananth Padmanabham [MSFT]
Microsoft SQL Server Support
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Please reply only to the newsgroups.
When posting, please state the version of SQL Server being used and the
error number/exact error message text received, if any.
Are you secure? For information about the Strategic Technology Protection
Program and to order your FREE Security Tool Kit, please visit
http://www.microsoft.com/security.
--
>From: "Michael" <Michael@.nospamplease.com>
>Subject: Enterprise Manager Problem
>Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:05:27 -0500
>Lines: 10
>X-Priority: 3
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
>Message-ID: <OFr$4QFCEHA.580@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>
>Newsgroups: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
>NNTP-Posting-Host: h-68-167-73-42.nycmny83.covad.net 68.167.73.42
>Path: cpmsftngxa06.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl
>Xref: cpmsftngxa06.phx.gbl microsoft.public.sqlserver.server:333657
>X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.sqlserver.server
>Hi. I got Enterprise Manager to work finally.
>However, the Columns are backwards when I retrieve all rows, and when i go
>to design a table.
>Meaning to say that the ID starts on right side of screen, and scrollbar is
>on left side (everything is backwards)
>in options of enterprise manager, it says english is default language.
>thanks
>

Friday, February 17, 2012

Enterprise Manager - Design Table

Hi all,
I've recently migrated to XP from win2K, and my new instalation of Enterprise Manager is behaving differently.
When I open the Design Table dialogue in Enterprise Manager, the toolbar appears in the parent MMC window. Took me a while to find it. Anyway, when I've made the changes, I click on the Script Changes button, and ... nothing happens.
Please help.
Chris
Chris,
I'd recommend re-installing SQL Server. Hopefully you are just using the toolset so it won't take long. If you are using the whole bundle you could take a copy of ALL your .mdf and .ldf files to save having to backup and restore.
Tim

Enterprise Manager - Design Table

Hi all,
I've recently migrated to XP from win2K, and my new instalation of Enterpris
e Manager is behaving differently.
When I open the Design Table dialogue in Enterprise Manager, the toolbar app
ears in the parent MMC window. Took me a while to find it. Anyway, when I've
made the changes, I click on the Script Changes button, and ... nothing hap
pens.
Please help.
ChrisChris,
I'd recommend re-installing SQL Server. Hopefully you are just using the to
olset so it won't take long. If you are using the whole bundle you could ta
ke a copy of ALL your .mdf and .ldf files to save having to backup and resto
re.
Tim