Field limits

Simple question, I think.
What is the # of fields (columns) SQL Server 2000 is
limited to in one table ?1024 columns.
-Sue
On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:30:28 -0700, "Michael forer"
<mykiv@.hotmail.com> wrote:
>Simple question, I think.
>What is the # of fields (columns) SQL Server 2000 is
>limited to in one table ?sql

Fetch limited rows sequentially

Hello Friends,
I want to fetch limited rows from single query (example:-1000 rows present in emp table , I want to fetch first 10 rows at a time and store in a file. Next iteration it has to fetch next 10 rows and store in another file like this it has to create 10 different files with 10 rows)
Thanks in advance
Waiting early reply
Regds
NitinHi Nitin,

SELECT *
FROM (SELECT TOP 10 *
FROM (SELECT TOP 20 *
FROM emp
ORDER BY LName ASC) AS t1
ORDER BY LName DESC) as t2
ORDER BY LName

This select will return the 10 after the first ten from emps table. Just loop through increasing the TOP 20 to TOP 30 and so on to get each interval of ten employers.

Hope this helps! :)
Robert

Feedback on design issue sought

First, a brief backgrounder . . . I work for a small but quickly
growing company with a voracious appetite for data but limited
resources to provide the infrastructure I think they need to supply
this data.
The problem . . . Our primary operations application data, which
represents much of the data employees would like to access for various
reporting needs, is hosted in an off-site SQL Server 2005 database. I
would like to provide local access to this data so that A) people
aren't reporting off of a production operations database and B) we
don't have to worry about VPN's, network issues, etc. My understanding
is that I cannot mirror a 2005 database to a 2000 database. Is this
correct? If so, does anyone have suggestions for an alternative
approach to the problem? I could do some hokey thing with scripts and
scheduled tasks and move the nightly bak file around and restore it
using DTS or something like that, but I was thinking there must be a
more elegant way to address the issue.
Any thoughts? 24 hour latency of the data is acceptable.
Thanks,
RichYou can only mirror from SQL 2005 to SQL 2005 servers.
You might be able to use replication for this depending on what ports are
open on your respective firewalls, or you could also use log shipping and
send the logs and backup via ftp. DTS is another option.
--
Hilary Cotter
Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
positions, strategies or opinions.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Rich" <rsbaier@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1161110521.900413.111550@.k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> First, a brief backgrounder . . . I work for a small but quickly
> growing company with a voracious appetite for data but limited
> resources to provide the infrastructure I think they need to supply
> this data.
> The problem . . . Our primary operations application data, which
> represents much of the data employees would like to access for various
> reporting needs, is hosted in an off-site SQL Server 2005 database. I
> would like to provide local access to this data so that A) people
> aren't reporting off of a production operations database and B) we
> don't have to worry about VPN's, network issues, etc. My understanding
> is that I cannot mirror a 2005 database to a 2000 database. Is this
> correct? If so, does anyone have suggestions for an alternative
> approach to the problem? I could do some hokey thing with scripts and
> scheduled tasks and move the nightly bak file around and restore it
> using DTS or something like that, but I was thinking there must be a
> more elegant way to address the issue.
> Any thoughts? 24 hour latency of the data is acceptable.
> Thanks,
> Rich
>|||On 17 Oct 2006 11:42:01 -0700, "Rich" <rsbaier@.gmail.com> wrote:
>Any thoughts? 24 hour latency of the data is acceptable.
Go with the .bak file.
J.|||Log Shipping could be a good solution for your situation.
--
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"Rich" <rsbaier@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1161110521.900413.111550@.k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> First, a brief backgrounder . . . I work for a small but quickly
> growing company with a voracious appetite for data but limited
> resources to provide the infrastructure I think they need to supply
> this data.
> The problem . . . Our primary operations application data, which
> represents much of the data employees would like to access for various
> reporting needs, is hosted in an off-site SQL Server 2005 database. I
> would like to provide local access to this data so that A) people
> aren't reporting off of a production operations database and B) we
> don't have to worry about VPN's, network issues, etc. My understanding
> is that I cannot mirror a 2005 database to a 2000 database. Is this
> correct? If so, does anyone have suggestions for an alternative
> approach to the problem? I could do some hokey thing with scripts and
> scheduled tasks and move the nightly bak file around and restore it
> using DTS or something like that, but I was thinking there must be a
> more elegant way to address the issue.
> Any thoughts? 24 hour latency of the data is acceptable.
> Thanks,
> Rich
>sql