Deinstall SQL 2000 instance?

Plaese help:
How to remove SQL 2000 server instance from the server?
SQL Installation CD does not give Remove option.
Should it be manual remove from Windows services, Programm
Files,Registry?
Thanks in advance,
Nick
Just like any other Windows application. Control Panel -> Add/Remove
Programs.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"nick" <nikolay.brodsky@.phs.com> wrote in message
news:1135284807.063825.230020@.g14g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> Plaese help:
> How to remove SQL 2000 server instance from the server?
> SQL Installation CD does not give Remove option.
> Should it be manual remove from Windows services, Programm
> Files,Registry?
> Thanks in advance,
> Nick
>
|||What if SQL does not appear on the Windows Programm list?
Thanks a lot for your quick response.
Nick
|||What if SQL does not appear on the Windows Programm list?
Thanks a lot for your quick response.
Nick
|||Then there is the hard way.
How to manually remove SQL Server 2000 default, named, or virtual instance
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/290991/en-us
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"nick" <nikolay.brodsky@.phs.com> wrote in message
news:1135286483.591103.324700@.o13g2000cwo.googlegr oups.com...
> What if SQL does not appear on the Windows Programm list?
> Thanks a lot for your quick response.
> Nick
>
|||Thanks again that helps a lot.
Have a nice Hollydays.
Nick

Deinstall SQL 2000 instance?

Plaese help:
How to remove SQL 2000 server instance from the server?
SQL Installation CD does not give Remove option.
Should it be manual remove from Windows services, Programm
Files,Registry?
Thanks in advance,
NickJust like any other Windows application. Control Panel -> Add/Remove
Programs.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"nick" <nikolay.brodsky@.phs.com> wrote in message
news:1135284807.063825.230020@.g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Plaese help:
> How to remove SQL 2000 server instance from the server?
> SQL Installation CD does not give Remove option.
> Should it be manual remove from Windows services, Programm
> Files,Registry?
> Thanks in advance,
> Nick
>|||What if SQL does not appear on the Windows Programm list?
Thanks a lot for your quick response.
Nick|||What if SQL does not appear on the Windows Programm list?
Thanks a lot for your quick response.
Nick|||Then there is the hard way.
How to manually remove SQL Server 2000 default, named, or virtual instance
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/290991/en-us
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"nick" <nikolay.brodsky@.phs.com> wrote in message
news:1135286483.591103.324700@.o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> What if SQL does not appear on the Windows Programm list?
> Thanks a lot for your quick response.
> Nick
>|||Thanks again that helps a lot.
Have a nice Hollydays.
Nick

Deinstall SQL 2000 instance?

Plaese help:
How to remove SQL 2000 server instance from the server?
SQL Installation CD does not give Remove option.
Should it be manual remove from Windows services, Programm
Files,Registry?
Thanks in advance,
NickJust like any other Windows application. Control Panel -> Add/Remove
Programs.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"nick" <nikolay.brodsky@.phs.com> wrote in message
news:1135284807.063825.230020@.g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Plaese help:
> How to remove SQL 2000 server instance from the server?
> SQL Installation CD does not give Remove option.
> Should it be manual remove from Windows services, Programm
> Files,Registry?
> Thanks in advance,
> Nick
>|||What if SQL does not appear on the Windows Programm list?
Thanks a lot for your quick response.
Nick|||What if SQL does not appear on the Windows Programm list?
Thanks a lot for your quick response.
Nick|||Then there is the hard way.
How to manually remove SQL Server 2000 default, named, or virtual instance
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/290991/en-us
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"nick" <nikolay.brodsky@.phs.com> wrote in message
news:1135286483.591103.324700@.o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> What if SQL does not appear on the Windows Programm list?
> Thanks a lot for your quick response.
> Nick
>|||Thanks again that helps a lot.
Have a nice Hollydays.
Nick

Degree of separation search

I have an application that lets users search based on degree of separation,
so for instance, a user can search for age, hobbies, etc. and limit the
search to just users who are 1 degree separate, 2 degrees separate, or 3
degrees separate.
However as it stands now, searches are taking a long long time because
according to the programmer, the degree of separation is calculated
dynamically upon search, and with a system of about 50,000 users this is
taking way over one minute to execute, causing timeouts in the browser.
Is there a better way to go about doing this type of search? Perhaps using
a scheduler to perform some calculations beforehand so the searches can use
it? Any feedback will be greatly appreciated.
Shabam
Read this article
http://www.sommarskog.se/dyn-search.html
"Shabam" <chalupa@.yomama-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:_aCdnc14X62v2bnfRVn-iw@.adelphia.com...
> I have an application that lets users search based on degree of
separation,
> so for instance, a user can search for age, hobbies, etc. and limit the
> search to just users who are 1 degree separate, 2 degrees separate, or 3
> degrees separate.
> However as it stands now, searches are taking a long long time because
> according to the programmer, the degree of separation is calculated
> dynamically upon search, and with a system of about 50,000 users this is
> taking way over one minute to execute, causing timeouts in the browser.
> Is there a better way to go about doing this type of search? Perhaps
using
> a scheduler to perform some calculations beforehand so the searches can
use
> it? Any feedback will be greatly appreciated.
>
|||"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:%23zTvJokHFHA.3624@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Shabam
> Read this article
> http://www.sommarskog.se/dyn-search.html
Thanks for the article link. However the main problem with this search is
the degree of separation search, not the other search criterias. It appears
the application is going through calculating the degree of separation of
each user, then taking the acceptable ones and doing a search on them. The
degree of separation is stored in a function, and thus is being called
hundres, perhaps thousands of times per search. This is why it's taking 1+
minute to do a search. Do you have any ideas/suggestions on how to do this
right?
|||"Shabam" <chalupa@.yomama-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:LNednSboiO-g2rnfRVn-iQ@.adelphia.com...
> "Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
> news:%23zTvJokHFHA.3624@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Thanks for the article link. However the main problem with this search is
> the degree of separation search, not the other search criterias. It
> appears
> the application is going through calculating the degree of separation of
> each user, then taking the acceptable ones and doing a search on them.
> The
> degree of separation is stored in a function, and thus is being called
> hundres, perhaps thousands of times per search. This is why it's taking
> 1+
> minute to do a search. Do you have any ideas/suggestions on how to do
> this
> right?
>
There's not much concrete advice we can give without table DDL, sample data
and an explanation of the expected results.
David
|||Basically, this is a spacial problem. What I find most often is that the
developer wants to take the parameters as dynamic, then calculate a
"distance" function between the user with respect to the remaining users
based on the chosen metrics. That is time consuming and expensive.
However, coordinates in "space" are fixed, relativistic effects aside. So,
they are not dynamic and everyone's "position" is known for all metrics.
The problem is that many metrics have differing scales, but we will ignore
that for the moment. So, from beginning geometry, we have for each user,
there position is the set of coordinates, with respect to the origin:
User A: (x1, x2, ..., xn)
User B: (y1, y2, ..., yn)
Their "distance" from the origin is just the Pythagorean Theorem: a^2 + b^2
= c^2, but in N dimensions. The "distance" of all users from a specific one
is just a change of coordinates such that the specific user is put at the
origin:
User A, new coordinates: (x1 - x1, x2 - x2, ..., xn - xn), which is 0 and
what we wanted. For all other users, with respect to the specific user:
User B, new coordinates: (y1 - x1, y2 - x2, ..., yn - xn).
Now, the "distance" from the specific user to any other, in that reference
frame, is just the multi-dimensional, Pythagorean Theorem:
[(y1 - x1)^2 + (y2 - x2)^2 + ... + (yn - xn)^2]^1/2 = distance.
This outlines a multi-dimensional sphere, centered on the specific user.
The point is that everyone's position in space is know with respect to a
common origin and can be calculated beforehand and saved. Now, if you know
my position, you know my direction from the origin, then all users that are
a similar distance from the origin as I am, and in the general direction as
me, must be near me. This logic will produce a subset. Depending on how
restrictive you need to be, like top 100, top 10, top 5, etc., you could
create a general list of others that are near enough to calculate the
specific value without having to calculate it for everyone.
Say you need the 10 closest. Then with a set of, say 100, that where in my
general direction, you could quickly calculate the distance function above
for a mere 100 or so others and come up with the 10 closest, orders of
magnitude quicker than you could if you calculated the distance for
everyone.
Hope this helps.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas

"Shabam" <chalupa@.yomama-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:LNednSboiO-g2rnfRVn-iQ@.adelphia.com...
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:%23zTvJokHFHA.3624@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Shabam
> Read this article
> http://www.sommarskog.se/dyn-search.html
Thanks for the article link. However the main problem with this search is
the degree of separation search, not the other search criterias. It appears
the application is going through calculating the degree of separation of
each user, then taking the acceptable ones and doing a search on them. The
degree of separation is stored in a function, and thus is being called
hundres, perhaps thousands of times per search. This is why it's taking 1+
minute to do a search. Do you have any ideas/suggestions on how to do this
right?
|||However as it stands now, searches are taking a long long time because
according to the programmer, the degree of separation is calculated
dynamically upon search, and with a system of about 50,000 users this
is
taking way over one minute to execute, causing timeouts in the browser
Have you tried to increase the timeout value?
Madhivanan
|||See http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?q=nearestExamplar for
further discussion along the lines of what Anthony has said.
Steve Kass
Drew University
Shabam wrote:

>I have an application that lets users search based on degree of separation,
>so for instance, a user can search for age, hobbies, etc. and limit the
>search to just users who are 1 degree separate, 2 degrees separate, or 3
>degrees separate.
>However as it stands now, searches are taking a long long time because
>according to the programmer, the degree of separation is calculated
>dynamically upon search, and with a system of about 50,000 users this is
>taking way over one minute to execute, causing timeouts in the browser.
>Is there a better way to go about doing this type of search? Perhaps using
>a scheduler to perform some calculations beforehand so the searches can use
>it? Any feedback will be greatly appreciated.
>
>
|||Thanks for the reply, but I think there's a misunderstanding here. When I
say degree of separation, I don't mean separation by physical distance, but
by friendship. For instance, A knows B, and B knows C. A doesn't know C.
In this case the relationship would be:
A <-> B <-> C
B would be a first degree friend of A, and C would be a second degree friend
of A, and so on.
The search is limiting based on this type of degree of separation.
|||Yes, I realize the answer I gave you was generic and mathematically based;
however, the logic is the same. For each user, you know there first level
acquantinces, etc., etc. This shouldn't change.
The only thing that is dynamic is which metrics to use for each search. If
you try to recompute it for each query, danamically, this becomes an M x N x
(N - 1) computation. As N or M gets large, this WILL NOT BE LINEAR; thus,
it does NOT scale well.
That, my friend, is a poorly written application and I wouldn't allow into
production. Add just 10% more users and it will bring your system to a
screetching halt!
Tell your "developer" to go back to school and learn what "good" code looks
like.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas

"Shabam" <chalupa@.yomama-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:O-idnU8g8Imw4bjfRVn-1w@.adelphia.com...
Thanks for the reply, but I think there's a misunderstanding here. When I
say degree of separation, I don't mean separation by physical distance, but
by friendship. For instance, A knows B, and B knows C. A doesn't know C.
In this case the relationship would be:
A <-> B <-> C
B would be a first degree friend of A, and C would be a second degree friend
of A, and so on.
The search is limiting based on this type of degree of separation.
|||"Shabam" <chalupa@.yomama-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:O-idnU8g8Imw4bjfRVn-1w@.adelphia.com...
> Thanks for the reply, but I think there's a misunderstanding here. When I
> say degree of separation, I don't mean separation by physical distance,
> but
> by friendship. For instance, A knows B, and B knows C. A doesn't know C.
> In this case the relationship would be:
> A <-> B <-> C
> B would be a first degree friend of A, and C would be a second degree
> friend
> of A, and so on.
> The search is limiting based on this type of degree of separation.
>
Ok. If you are just looking for a couple of "levels" you can do this pretty
quickly with a join.
There are several tricky problems with storing and sorting this kind of
relationship data, and you still didn't post DDL or sample data, so here's a
simple example:
drop table friend
drop table person
go
create table person
(
name varchar(20) primary key,
favorite_band varchar(50)
)
create table friend
(
friend1 varchar(20) not null references person,
friend2 varchar(20) not null references person,
constraint pk_friends primary key (friend1,friend2)
)
create index ix_friend2 on friend(friend2)
insert into person (name,favorite_band) values ('Joe','Def Leopard')
insert into person (name,favorite_band) values ('Alex','Wham')
insert into person (name,favorite_band) values ('Helmut','David Hasselhoff')
insert into person (name,favorite_band) values ('Dennis','Def Leopard')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Joe','Alex')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Alex','Joe')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Joe','Helmut')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Helmut','Joe')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Helmut','Dennis')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Dennis','Helmut')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Dennis','Alex')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Alex','Dennis')
'Joe has two tickes to the Def Leopard concert and needs someone to'
go
'with, but being shy he wants to go with a friend or a friend of a friend'
create view friends_and_friends_of_friends
as
select
p0.name,
p0.favorite_band,
p1.name friend_name,
p1.favorite_band friend_favorite_band,
p2.name friend_of_friend_name,
p2.favorite_band friend_of_friend_favorite_band
from
person p0
join friend f1 on p0.name = f1.friend1
join person p1 on f1.friend2 = p1.name
join friend f2 on p1.name = f2.friend1
join person p2 on p2.name = f2.friend2
where
p0.name <> p2.name
This query tells Joe that he can go with Dennis, and that he can get
introduced through either Alex or Helmut.
select *
from friends_and_friends_of_friends
where
name = 'Joe'
and
(
friend_favorite_band = 'Def Leopard'
or
friend_of_friend_favorite_band = 'Def Leopard'
)
David
sql

Degree of separation search

I have an application that lets users search based on degree of separation,
so for instance, a user can search for age, hobbies, etc. and limit the
search to just users who are 1 degree separate, 2 degrees separate, or 3
degrees separate.
However as it stands now, searches are taking a long long time because
according to the programmer, the degree of separation is calculated
dynamically upon search, and with a system of about 50,000 users this is
taking way over one minute to execute, causing timeouts in the browser.
Is there a better way to go about doing this type of search? Perhaps using
a scheduler to perform some calculations beforehand so the searches can use
it? Any feedback will be greatly appreciated.Shabam
Read this article
http://www.sommarskog.se/dyn-search.html
"Shabam" <chalupa@.yomama-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:_aCdnc14X62v2bnfRVn-iw@.adelphia.com...
> I have an application that lets users search based on degree of
separation,
> so for instance, a user can search for age, hobbies, etc. and limit the
> search to just users who are 1 degree separate, 2 degrees separate, or 3
> degrees separate.
> However as it stands now, searches are taking a long long time because
> according to the programmer, the degree of separation is calculated
> dynamically upon search, and with a system of about 50,000 users this is
> taking way over one minute to execute, causing timeouts in the browser.
> Is there a better way to go about doing this type of search? Perhaps
using
> a scheduler to perform some calculations beforehand so the searches can
use
> it? Any feedback will be greatly appreciated.
>|||"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:%23zTvJokHFHA.3624@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Shabam
> Read this article
> http://www.sommarskog.se/dyn-search.html
Thanks for the article link. However the main problem with this search is
the degree of separation search, not the other search criterias. It appears
the application is going through calculating the degree of separation of
each user, then taking the acceptable ones and doing a search on them. The
degree of separation is stored in a function, and thus is being called
hundres, perhaps thousands of times per search. This is why it's taking 1+
minute to do a search. Do you have any ideas/suggestions on how to do this
right?|||"Shabam" <chalupa@.yomama-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:LNednSboiO-g2rnfRVn-iQ@.adelphia.com...
> "Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
> news:%23zTvJokHFHA.3624@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Thanks for the article link. However the main problem with this search is
> the degree of separation search, not the other search criterias. It
> appears
> the application is going through calculating the degree of separation of
> each user, then taking the acceptable ones and doing a search on them.
> The
> degree of separation is stored in a function, and thus is being called
> hundres, perhaps thousands of times per search. This is why it's taking
> 1+
> minute to do a search. Do you have any ideas/suggestions on how to do
> this
> right?
>
There's not much concrete advice we can give without table DDL, sample data
and an explanation of the expected results.
David|||Basically, this is a spacial problem. What I find most often is that the
developer wants to take the parameters as dynamic, then calculate a
"distance" function between the user with respect to the remaining users
based on the chosen metrics. That is time consuming and expensive.
However, coordinates in "space" are fixed, relativistic effects aside. So,
they are not dynamic and everyone's "position" is known for all metrics.
The problem is that many metrics have differing scales, but we will ignore
that for the moment. So, from beginning geometry, we have for each user,
there position is the set of coordinates, with respect to the origin:
User A: (x1, x2, ..., xn)
User B: (y1, y2, ..., yn)
Their "distance" from the origin is just the Pythagorean Theorem: a^2 + b^2
= c^2, but in N dimensions. The "distance" of all users from a specific one
is just a change of coordinates such that the specific user is put at the
origin:
User A, new coordinates: (x1 - x1, x2 - x2, ..., xn - xn), which is 0 and
what we wanted. For all other users, with respect to the specific user:
User B, new coordinates: (y1 - x1, y2 - x2, ..., yn - xn).
Now, the "distance" from the specific user to any other, in that reference
frame, is just the multi-dimensional, Pythagorean Theorem:
[(y1 - x1)^2 + (y2 - x2)^2 + ... + (yn - xn)^2]^1/2 = distance.
This outlines a multi-dimensional sphere, centered on the specific user.
The point is that everyone's position in space is know with respect to a
common origin and can be calculated beforehand and saved. Now, if you know
my position, you know my direction from the origin, then all users that are
a similar distance from the origin as I am, and in the general direction as
me, must be near me. This logic will produce a subset. Depending on how
restrictive you need to be, like top 100, top 10, top 5, etc., you could
create a general list of others that are near enough to calculate the
specific value without having to calculate it for everyone.
Say you need the 10 closest. Then with a set of, say 100, that where in my
general direction, you could quickly calculate the distance function above
for a mere 100 or so others and come up with the 10 closest, orders of
magnitude quicker than you could if you calculated the distance for
everyone.
Hope this helps.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Shabam" <chalupa@.yomama-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:LNednSboiO-g2rnfRVn-iQ@.adelphia.com...
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:%23zTvJokHFHA.3624@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Shabam
> Read this article
> http://www.sommarskog.se/dyn-search.html
Thanks for the article link. However the main problem with this search is
the degree of separation search, not the other search criterias. It appears
the application is going through calculating the degree of separation of
each user, then taking the acceptable ones and doing a search on them. The
degree of separation is stored in a function, and thus is being called
hundres, perhaps thousands of times per search. This is why it's taking 1+
minute to do a search. Do you have any ideas/suggestions on how to do this
right?|||However as it stands now, searches are taking a long long time because
according to the programmer, the degree of separation is calculated
dynamically upon search, and with a system of about 50,000 users this
is
taking way over one minute to execute, causing timeouts in the browser
Have you tried to increase the timeout value?
Madhivanan|||See http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?q=nearestExamplar for
further discussion along the lines of what Anthony has said.
Steve Kass
Drew University
Shabam wrote:

>I have an application that lets users search based on degree of separation,
>so for instance, a user can search for age, hobbies, etc. and limit the
>search to just users who are 1 degree separate, 2 degrees separate, or 3
>degrees separate.
>However as it stands now, searches are taking a long long time because
>according to the programmer, the degree of separation is calculated
>dynamically upon search, and with a system of about 50,000 users this is
>taking way over one minute to execute, causing timeouts in the browser.
>Is there a better way to go about doing this type of search? Perhaps using
>a scheduler to perform some calculations beforehand so the searches can use
>it? Any feedback will be greatly appreciated.
>
>|||Thanks for the reply, but I think there's a misunderstanding here. When I
say degree of separation, I don't mean separation by physical distance, but
by friendship. For instance, A knows B, and B knows C. A doesn't know C.
In this case the relationship would be:
A <-> B <-> C
B would be a first degree friend of A, and C would be a second degree friend
of A, and so on.
The search is limiting based on this type of degree of separation.|||Yes, I realize the answer I gave you was generic and mathematically based;
however, the logic is the same. For each user, you know there first level
acquantinces, etc., etc. This shouldn't change.
The only thing that is dynamic is which metrics to use for each search. If
you try to recompute it for each query, danamically, this becomes an M x N x
(N - 1) computation. As N or M gets large, this WILL NOT BE LINEAR; thus,
it does NOT scale well.
That, my friend, is a poorly written application and I wouldn't allow into
production. Add just 10% more users and it will bring your system to a
screetching halt!
Tell your "developer" to go back to school and learn what "good" code looks
like.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Shabam" <chalupa@.yomama-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:O-idnU8g8Imw4bjfRVn-1w@.adelphia.com...
Thanks for the reply, but I think there's a misunderstanding here. When I
say degree of separation, I don't mean separation by physical distance, but
by friendship. For instance, A knows B, and B knows C. A doesn't know C.
In this case the relationship would be:
A <-> B <-> C
B would be a first degree friend of A, and C would be a second degree friend
of A, and so on.
The search is limiting based on this type of degree of separation.|||"Shabam" <chalupa@.yomama-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:O-idnU8g8Imw4bjfRVn-1w@.adelphia.com...
> Thanks for the reply, but I think there's a misunderstanding here. When I
> say degree of separation, I don't mean separation by physical distance,
> but
> by friendship. For instance, A knows B, and B knows C. A doesn't know C.
> In this case the relationship would be:
> A <-> B <-> C
> B would be a first degree friend of A, and C would be a second degree
> friend
> of A, and so on.
> The search is limiting based on this type of degree of separation.
>
Ok. If you are just looking for a couple of "levels" you can do this pretty
quickly with a join.
There are several tricky problems with storing and sorting this kind of
relationship data, and you still didn't post DDL or sample data, so here's a
simple example:
drop table friend
drop table person
go
create table person
(
name varchar(20) primary key,
favorite_band varchar(50)
)
create table friend
(
friend1 varchar(20) not null references person,
friend2 varchar(20) not null references person,
constraint pk_friends primary key (friend1,friend2)
)
create index ix_friend2 on friend(friend2)
insert into person (name,favorite_band) values ('Joe','Def Leopard')
insert into person (name,favorite_band) values ('Alex','Wham')
insert into person (name,favorite_band) values ('Helmut','David Hasselhoff')
insert into person (name,favorite_band) values ('Dennis','Def Leopard')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Joe','Alex')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Alex','Joe')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Joe','Helmut')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Helmut','Joe')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Helmut','Dennis')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Dennis','Helmut')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Dennis','Alex')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Alex','Dennis')
'Joe has two tickes to the Def Leopard concert and needs someone to'
go
'with, but being shy he wants to go with a friend or a friend of a friend'
create view friends_and_friends_of_friends
as
select
p0.name,
p0.favorite_band,
p1.name friend_name,
p1.favorite_band friend_favorite_band,
p2.name friend_of_friend_name,
p2.favorite_band friend_of_friend_favorite_band
from
person p0
join friend f1 on p0.name = f1.friend1
join person p1 on f1.friend2 = p1.name
join friend f2 on p1.name = f2.friend1
join person p2 on p2.name = f2.friend2
where
p0.name <> p2.name
This query tells Joe that he can go with Dennis, and that he can get
introduced through either Alex or Helmut.
select *
from friends_and_friends_of_friends
where
name = 'Joe'
and
(
friend_favorite_band = 'Def Leopard'
or
friend_of_friend_favorite_band = 'Def Leopard'
)
David

Degree of separation search

I have an application that lets users search based on degree of separation,
so for instance, a user can search for age, hobbies, etc. and limit the
search to just users who are 1 degree separate, 2 degrees separate, or 3
degrees separate.
However as it stands now, searches are taking a long long time because
according to the programmer, the degree of separation is calculated
dynamically upon search, and with a system of about 50,000 users this is
taking way over one minute to execute, causing timeouts in the browser.
Is there a better way to go about doing this type of search? Perhaps using
a scheduler to perform some calculations beforehand so the searches can use
it? Any feedback will be greatly appreciated.Shabam
Read this article
http://www.sommarskog.se/dyn-search.html
"Shabam" <chalupa@.yomama-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:_aCdnc14X62v2bnfRVn-iw@.adelphia.com...
> I have an application that lets users search based on degree of
separation,
> so for instance, a user can search for age, hobbies, etc. and limit the
> search to just users who are 1 degree separate, 2 degrees separate, or 3
> degrees separate.
> However as it stands now, searches are taking a long long time because
> according to the programmer, the degree of separation is calculated
> dynamically upon search, and with a system of about 50,000 users this is
> taking way over one minute to execute, causing timeouts in the browser.
> Is there a better way to go about doing this type of search? Perhaps
using
> a scheduler to perform some calculations beforehand so the searches can
use
> it? Any feedback will be greatly appreciated.
>|||"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:%23zTvJokHFHA.3624@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Shabam
> Read this article
> http://www.sommarskog.se/dyn-search.html
Thanks for the article link. However the main problem with this search is
the degree of separation search, not the other search criterias. It appears
the application is going through calculating the degree of separation of
each user, then taking the acceptable ones and doing a search on them. The
degree of separation is stored in a function, and thus is being called
hundres, perhaps thousands of times per search. This is why it's taking 1+
minute to do a search. Do you have any ideas/suggestions on how to do this
right?|||"Shabam" <chalupa@.yomama-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:LNednSboiO-g2rnfRVn-iQ@.adelphia.com...
> "Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
> news:%23zTvJokHFHA.3624@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> Shabam
>> Read this article
>> http://www.sommarskog.se/dyn-search.html
> Thanks for the article link. However the main problem with this search is
> the degree of separation search, not the other search criterias. It
> appears
> the application is going through calculating the degree of separation of
> each user, then taking the acceptable ones and doing a search on them.
> The
> degree of separation is stored in a function, and thus is being called
> hundres, perhaps thousands of times per search. This is why it's taking
> 1+
> minute to do a search. Do you have any ideas/suggestions on how to do
> this
> right?
>
There's not much concrete advice we can give without table DDL, sample data
and an explanation of the expected results.
David|||Basically, this is a spacial problem. What I find most often is that the
developer wants to take the parameters as dynamic, then calculate a
"distance" function between the user with respect to the remaining users
based on the chosen metrics. That is time consuming and expensive.
However, coordinates in "space" are fixed, relativistic effects aside. So,
they are not dynamic and everyone's "position" is known for all metrics.
The problem is that many metrics have differing scales, but we will ignore
that for the moment. So, from beginning geometry, we have for each user,
there position is the set of coordinates, with respect to the origin:
User A: (x1, x2, ..., xn)
User B: (y1, y2, ..., yn)
Their "distance" from the origin is just the Pythagorean Theorem: a^2 + b^2
= c^2, but in N dimensions. The "distance" of all users from a specific one
is just a change of coordinates such that the specific user is put at the
origin:
User A, new coordinates: (x1 - x1, x2 - x2, ..., xn - xn), which is 0 and
what we wanted. For all other users, with respect to the specific user:
User B, new coordinates: (y1 - x1, y2 - x2, ..., yn - xn).
Now, the "distance" from the specific user to any other, in that reference
frame, is just the multi-dimensional, Pythagorean Theorem:
[(y1 - x1)^2 + (y2 - x2)^2 + ... + (yn - xn)^2]^1/2 = distance.
This outlines a multi-dimensional sphere, centered on the specific user.
The point is that everyone's position in space is know with respect to a
common origin and can be calculated beforehand and saved. Now, if you know
my position, you know my direction from the origin, then all users that are
a similar distance from the origin as I am, and in the general direction as
me, must be near me. This logic will produce a subset. Depending on how
restrictive you need to be, like top 100, top 10, top 5, etc., you could
create a general list of others that are near enough to calculate the
specific value without having to calculate it for everyone.
Say you need the 10 closest. Then with a set of, say 100, that where in my
general direction, you could quickly calculate the distance function above
for a mere 100 or so others and come up with the 10 closest, orders of
magnitude quicker than you could if you calculated the distance for
everyone.
Hope this helps.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Shabam" <chalupa@.yomama-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:LNednSboiO-g2rnfRVn-iQ@.adelphia.com...
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> wrote in message
news:%23zTvJokHFHA.3624@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Shabam
> Read this article
> http://www.sommarskog.se/dyn-search.html
Thanks for the article link. However the main problem with this search is
the degree of separation search, not the other search criterias. It appears
the application is going through calculating the degree of separation of
each user, then taking the acceptable ones and doing a search on them. The
degree of separation is stored in a function, and thus is being called
hundres, perhaps thousands of times per search. This is why it's taking 1+
minute to do a search. Do you have any ideas/suggestions on how to do this
right?|||However as it stands now, searches are taking a long long time because
according to the programmer, the degree of separation is calculated
dynamically upon search, and with a system of about 50,000 users this
is
taking way over one minute to execute, causing timeouts in the browser
Have you tried to increase the timeout value?
Madhivanan|||See http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?q=nearestExamplar for
further discussion along the lines of what Anthony has said.
Steve Kass
Drew University
Shabam wrote:
>I have an application that lets users search based on degree of separation,
>so for instance, a user can search for age, hobbies, etc. and limit the
>search to just users who are 1 degree separate, 2 degrees separate, or 3
>degrees separate.
>However as it stands now, searches are taking a long long time because
>according to the programmer, the degree of separation is calculated
>dynamically upon search, and with a system of about 50,000 users this is
>taking way over one minute to execute, causing timeouts in the browser.
>Is there a better way to go about doing this type of search? Perhaps using
>a scheduler to perform some calculations beforehand so the searches can use
>it? Any feedback will be greatly appreciated.
>
>|||Thanks for the reply, but I think there's a misunderstanding here. When I
say degree of separation, I don't mean separation by physical distance, but
by friendship. For instance, A knows B, and B knows C. A doesn't know C.
In this case the relationship would be:
A <-> B <-> C
B would be a first degree friend of A, and C would be a second degree friend
of A, and so on.
The search is limiting based on this type of degree of separation.|||Yes, I realize the answer I gave you was generic and mathematically based;
however, the logic is the same. For each user, you know there first level
acquantinces, etc., etc. This shouldn't change.
The only thing that is dynamic is which metrics to use for each search. If
you try to recompute it for each query, danamically, this becomes an M x N x
(N - 1) computation. As N or M gets large, this WILL NOT BE LINEAR; thus,
it does NOT scale well.
That, my friend, is a poorly written application and I wouldn't allow into
production. Add just 10% more users and it will bring your system to a
screetching halt!
Tell your "developer" to go back to school and learn what "good" code looks
like.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Shabam" <chalupa@.yomama-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:O-idnU8g8Imw4bjfRVn-1w@.adelphia.com...
Thanks for the reply, but I think there's a misunderstanding here. When I
say degree of separation, I don't mean separation by physical distance, but
by friendship. For instance, A knows B, and B knows C. A doesn't know C.
In this case the relationship would be:
A <-> B <-> C
B would be a first degree friend of A, and C would be a second degree friend
of A, and so on.
The search is limiting based on this type of degree of separation.|||"Shabam" <chalupa@.yomama-nospam.com> wrote in message
news:O-idnU8g8Imw4bjfRVn-1w@.adelphia.com...
> Thanks for the reply, but I think there's a misunderstanding here. When I
> say degree of separation, I don't mean separation by physical distance,
> but
> by friendship. For instance, A knows B, and B knows C. A doesn't know C.
> In this case the relationship would be:
> A <-> B <-> C
> B would be a first degree friend of A, and C would be a second degree
> friend
> of A, and so on.
> The search is limiting based on this type of degree of separation.
>
Ok. If you are just looking for a couple of "levels" you can do this pretty
quickly with a join.
There are several tricky problems with storing and sorting this kind of
relationship data, and you still didn't post DDL or sample data, so here's a
simple example:
drop table friend
drop table person
go
create table person
(
name varchar(20) primary key,
favorite_band varchar(50)
)
create table friend
(
friend1 varchar(20) not null references person,
friend2 varchar(20) not null references person,
constraint pk_friends primary key (friend1,friend2)
)
create index ix_friend2 on friend(friend2)
insert into person (name,favorite_band) values ('Joe','Def Leopard')
insert into person (name,favorite_band) values ('Alex','Wham')
insert into person (name,favorite_band) values ('Helmut','David Hasselhoff')
insert into person (name,favorite_band) values ('Dennis','Def Leopard')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Joe','Alex')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Alex','Joe')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Joe','Helmut')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Helmut','Joe')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Helmut','Dennis')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Dennis','Helmut')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Dennis','Alex')
insert into friend (friend1,friend2) values ('Alex','Dennis')
'Joe has two tickes to the Def Leopard concert and needs someone to'
go
'with, but being shy he wants to go with a friend or a friend of a friend'
create view friends_and_friends_of_friends
as
select
p0.name,
p0.favorite_band,
p1.name friend_name,
p1.favorite_band friend_favorite_band,
p2.name friend_of_friend_name,
p2.favorite_band friend_of_friend_favorite_band
from
person p0
join friend f1 on p0.name = f1.friend1
join person p1 on f1.friend2 = p1.name
join friend f2 on p1.name = f2.friend1
join person p2 on p2.name = f2.friend2
where
p0.name <> p2.name
This query tells Joe that he can go with Dennis, and that he can get
introduced through either Alex or Helmut.
select *
from friends_and_friends_of_friends
where
name = 'Joe'
and
(
friend_favorite_band = 'Def Leopard'
or
friend_of_friend_favorite_band = 'Def Leopard'
)
David

Defaulting Parameters based on time of day?

I need to set up some parameters which are based on the time of day. For instance, night shift vs/ day shift. If I run the report during the day, default to the day shift criteria (5 am to 5 pm), and likewise for the night shift (5 pm to 5 am). On the night shift, I also need to accomodate for the change in dates as well. Is this even possible in a single report? HELP!!

Thanks!

Does it really need to be parameters, or could you just check the time in your SQL or report code?

default versus named instance with custom app

Are there some general recommendations/guidelines/best practices for choosing to run your custom application against a default or named instance of SQL Server?

We have an application, which in it's stand-alone/local configuration, installs an MSDE default instance if it does not already exist, and runs against this instance. In addition, regardless of whether or not it installs the default instance, it expects to run against the default instance.

We are looking into migrating to SQL Server 2005 Express (Compact almost fits our needs, but not quite), and would like to pay more attention to the best solution regarding the use of instances, default versus named.

Thanks

hi,

1TechZ wrote:

Are there some general recommendations/guidelines/best practices for choosing to run your custom application against a default or named instance of SQL Server?

the "general" recomendation is to use a "standard" named instance named SQLExpress idf you do not need particular custom settings..

We have an application, which in it's stand-alone/local configuration, installs an MSDE default instance if it does not already exist, and runs against this instance. In addition, regardless of whether or not it installs the default instance, it expects to run against the default instance.

this is not a "best practice" behaviour.. users should be able to identify the instance the application should run against..

regards

|||

As Andrea indicated, it will be 'best' you your application has its own instance. That way you will have complete control over the security.

If you use the default instance, or the SQLExpress instance, since the user may have administrator priviledges, he/she may be able to access your database, even altering schema and/or code. Not particularly something you want to have to support.

Default Versus Named Instance

Default uses: Servername
Named uses: Servername\Instancename
Clusters are a whole different beast entirely. Are you on a cluster or
stand-alone?
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Matt Tinney" <matt.tinney@.css-security.com> wrote in message
news:eeAQaxv$GHA.4292@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> When makes an application require the use of a default SQL instance versus
> named instances? If named instances are allowed with an application, how
> does one specify the specific instance to use?
>
> Clusters are a whole different beast entirely. Are you on a cluster or
> stand-alone?
We are talking about connecting to a SQL server instance from a client app;
it should not matter whether or not the SQL instance runs in a cluster.
Linchi
"Kevin3NF" wrote:

> Default uses: Servername
> Named uses: Servername\Instancename
> Clusters are a whole different beast entirely. Are you on a cluster or
> stand-alone?
> --
> Kevin Hill
> 3NF Consulting
> http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
>
> "Matt Tinney" <matt.tinney@.css-security.com> wrote in message
> news:eeAQaxv$GHA.4292@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
>
|||Except for the Virtual Server name being a required part of the connection
parameters
Kevin Hill
3NF Consulting
http://www.3nf-inc.com/NewsGroups.htm
Real-world stuff I run across with SQL Server:
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com
"Linchi Shea" <LinchiShea@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F6590417-338D-4794-B22D-768F497B7857@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> We are talking about connecting to a SQL server instance from a client
> app;
> it should not matter whether or not the SQL instance runs in a cluster.
> Linchi
> "Kevin3NF" wrote:

Default Versus Named Instance

I think I see what you ar asking.
Without a client side alias to make the ServerName\InstanceName format look
like a default instance, older MDAC versions (2.6 and lower, I think) cannot
connect to a named instance. This is client library issue, not an
application issue.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
"Matt Tinney" <matt.tinney@.css-security.com> wrote in message
news:eeAQaxv$GHA.4292@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> When makes an application require the use of a default SQL instance versus
> named instances? If named instances are allowed with an application, how
> does one specify the specific instance to use?
>
An alternative would be to have the server use a dedicated port for the name
instanced, as opposed to dynamic ports, and then specify that in the Data
Source parameter:
MyServer,11291
Anthony Thomas

"Geoff N. Hiten" <SQLCraftsman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:eo$acrbAHHA.2328@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> I think I see what you ar asking.
> Without a client side alias to make the ServerName\InstanceName format
look
> like a default instance, older MDAC versions (2.6 and lower, I think)
cannot[vbcol=seagreen]
> connect to a named instance. This is client library issue, not an
> application issue.
> --
> Geoff N. Hiten
> Senior Database Administrator
> Microsoft SQL Server MVP
>
> "Matt Tinney" <matt.tinney@.css-security.com> wrote in message
> news:eeAQaxv$GHA.4292@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
versus
>