Hi,
I want to print a field in the page header. Since there is no option in RS
to include a database field in Page Header, I placed the Field in a Table
header and set the the Repeat Header on Each Page Property. But it prints
the first value of the record on all page. Is it anyway to print the
database fields dynamically on the page header or table header.
TIA,
SamuelThe ReportItems!<ReportItemName>.Value syntax will allow you to do this. See
the sample report at the end of this posting. Also see the "Using Global
Collections" topic in SQL Server 2000 Reporting Services BOL (Books Online).
--
Bruce Johnson [MSFT]
Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Samuel" <samuel@.photoninfotech.com> wrote in message
news:ehqgckWdEHA.592@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> I want to print a field in the page header. Since there is no option in RS
> to include a database field in Page Header, I placed the Field in a Table
> header and set the the Repeat Header on Each Page Property. But it prints
> the first value of the record on all page. Is it anyway to print the
> database fields dynamically on the page header or table header.
> TIA,
> Samuel
>
ReportItemsSample.rdl
--
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Report
xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sqlserver/reporting/2003/10/reportdefini
tion"
xmlns:rd="">http://schemas.microsoft.com/SQLServer/reporting/reportdesigner">
<PageHeader>
<ReportItems>
<Textbox Name="textbox2">
<Style>
<PaddingLeft>2pt</PaddingLeft>
<PaddingBottom>2pt</PaddingBottom>
<PaddingTop>2pt</PaddingTop>
<PaddingRight>2pt</PaddingRight>
</Style>
<Top>0.125in</Top>
<rd:DefaultName>textbox2</rd:DefaultName>
<Height>0.25in</Height>
<Width>1.75in</Width>
<CanGrow>true</CanGrow>
<Value>=ReportItems!textbox1.Value</Value>
<Left>0.25in</Left>
</Textbox>
</ReportItems>
<PrintOnLastPage>true</PrintOnLastPage>
<PrintOnFirstPage>true</PrintOnFirstPage>
<Style />
<Height>0.5in</Height>
</PageHeader>
<RightMargin>1in</RightMargin>
<Body>
<ReportItems>
<Textbox Name="textbox1">
<Style>
<PaddingLeft>2pt</PaddingLeft>
<PaddingBottom>2pt</PaddingBottom>
<PaddingTop>2pt</PaddingTop>
<PaddingRight>2pt</PaddingRight>
</Style>
<Top>0.25in</Top>
<rd:DefaultName>textbox1</rd:DefaultName>
<Height>0.25in</Height>
<Width>1.75in</Width>
<CanGrow>true</CanGrow>
<Value>Some Text in the Body. This could be a field reference (i.e.
=Fields!FieldName.Value)</Value>
<Left>0.25in</Left>
</Textbox>
</ReportItems>
<Style />
<Height>1.875in</Height>
</Body>
<TopMargin>1in</TopMargin>
<Width>6.50001in</Width>
<LeftMargin>1in</LeftMargin>
<rd:SnapToGrid>true</rd:SnapToGrid>
<rd:DrawGrid>true</rd:DrawGrid>
<rd:ReportID>d14a8b9b-cb8d-481b-8351-98a44abce6d7</rd:ReportID>
<BottomMargin>1in</BottomMargin>
<Language>en-US</Language>
</Report>
Showing posts with label placed. Show all posts
Showing posts with label placed. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Datafiles placement in filegroup
I'm working with a production database connecting remotely. All the datafile
s, index files and log is placed on the same disk but in different filegroup
names based on separate physical files. But I expect if I place the index f
iles or/add log files sep
arate from the datafiles I mean in different disk it will improve the perfor
mance.
If my expectation is correct then can I change the place of the index and lo
g files in separate location while the database is on-line yes the database
is implemented with log-shipping too.
Please evaluate my query and do give a proper suggestion.
Thanks in advance
Sunilsurely it will improve the performance if the log files are placed seperate
from the data files (different disks).
for the indexes u can delete the existing index and recreate it specifying
the new location.
"Sunil" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4690C174-4988-4737-82D9-7C0ED08FDF5D@.microsoft.com...
datafiles, index files and log is placed on the same disk but in different
filegroup names based on separate physical files. But I expect if I place
the index files or/add log files separate from the datafiles I mean in
different disk it will improve the performance.
log files in separate location while the database is on-line yes the
database is implemented with log-shipping too.
s, index files and log is placed on the same disk but in different filegroup
names based on separate physical files. But I expect if I place the index f
iles or/add log files sep
arate from the datafiles I mean in different disk it will improve the perfor
mance.
If my expectation is correct then can I change the place of the index and lo
g files in separate location while the database is on-line yes the database
is implemented with log-shipping too.
Please evaluate my query and do give a proper suggestion.
Thanks in advance
Sunilsurely it will improve the performance if the log files are placed seperate
from the data files (different disks).
for the indexes u can delete the existing index and recreate it specifying
the new location.
"Sunil" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4690C174-4988-4737-82D9-7C0ED08FDF5D@.microsoft.com...
quote:
> I'm working with a production database connecting remotely. All the
datafiles, index files and log is placed on the same disk but in different
filegroup names based on separate physical files. But I expect if I place
the index files or/add log files separate from the datafiles I mean in
different disk it will improve the performance.
quote:
> If my expectation is correct then can I change the place of the index and
log files in separate location while the database is on-line yes the
database is implemented with log-shipping too.
quote:
>
> Please evaluate my query and do give a proper suggestion.
>
> Thanks in advance
> Sunil
>
Datafiles placement in filegroup
I'm working with a production database connecting remotely. All the datafiles, index files and log is placed on the same disk but in different filegroup names based on separate physical files. But I expect if I place the index files or/add log files separate from the datafiles I mean in different disk it will improve the performance.
If my expectation is correct then can I change the place of the index and log files in separate location while the database is on-line yes the database is implemented with log-shipping too.
Please evaluate my query and do give a proper suggestion.
Thanks in advance
Sunilsurely it will improve the performance if the log files are placed seperate
from the data files (different disks).
for the indexes u can delete the existing index and recreate it specifying
the new location.
"Sunil" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4690C174-4988-4737-82D9-7C0ED08FDF5D@.microsoft.com...
> I'm working with a production database connecting remotely. All the
datafiles, index files and log is placed on the same disk but in different
filegroup names based on separate physical files. But I expect if I place
the index files or/add log files separate from the datafiles I mean in
different disk it will improve the performance.
> If my expectation is correct then can I change the place of the index and
log files in separate location while the database is on-line yes the
database is implemented with log-shipping too.
>
> Please evaluate my query and do give a proper suggestion.
>
> Thanks in advance
> Sunil
>|||You are mostly correct.
Creating new files doesn't automatically improve
performace, it also depends upon the raid configuration of
the disk its going on.
For instance putting a log file on a RAID 0 disk will make
it faster than putting it on a raid 5 disk.
Although its different for every type of application a
normal implementation with cost constraints its to put the
log files on a raid 0 or raid 0+1 with the data files on
raid 5.
J
>--Original Message--
>I'm working with a production database connecting
remotely. All the datafiles, index files and log is placed
on the same disk but in different filegroup names based on
separate physical files. But I expect if I place the index
files or/add log files separate from the datafiles I
mean in different disk it will improve the performance.
>If my expectation is correct then can I change the place
of the index and log files in separate location while the
database is on-line yes the database is implemented with
log-shipping too.
>
>Please evaluate my query and do give a proper suggestion.
>
>Thanks in advance
>Sunil
>.
>
If my expectation is correct then can I change the place of the index and log files in separate location while the database is on-line yes the database is implemented with log-shipping too.
Please evaluate my query and do give a proper suggestion.
Thanks in advance
Sunilsurely it will improve the performance if the log files are placed seperate
from the data files (different disks).
for the indexes u can delete the existing index and recreate it specifying
the new location.
"Sunil" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4690C174-4988-4737-82D9-7C0ED08FDF5D@.microsoft.com...
> I'm working with a production database connecting remotely. All the
datafiles, index files and log is placed on the same disk but in different
filegroup names based on separate physical files. But I expect if I place
the index files or/add log files separate from the datafiles I mean in
different disk it will improve the performance.
> If my expectation is correct then can I change the place of the index and
log files in separate location while the database is on-line yes the
database is implemented with log-shipping too.
>
> Please evaluate my query and do give a proper suggestion.
>
> Thanks in advance
> Sunil
>|||You are mostly correct.
Creating new files doesn't automatically improve
performace, it also depends upon the raid configuration of
the disk its going on.
For instance putting a log file on a RAID 0 disk will make
it faster than putting it on a raid 5 disk.
Although its different for every type of application a
normal implementation with cost constraints its to put the
log files on a raid 0 or raid 0+1 with the data files on
raid 5.
J
>--Original Message--
>I'm working with a production database connecting
remotely. All the datafiles, index files and log is placed
on the same disk but in different filegroup names based on
separate physical files. But I expect if I place the index
files or/add log files separate from the datafiles I
mean in different disk it will improve the performance.
>If my expectation is correct then can I change the place
of the index and log files in separate location while the
database is on-line yes the database is implemented with
log-shipping too.
>
>Please evaluate my query and do give a proper suggestion.
>
>Thanks in advance
>Sunil
>.
>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)