Best Practices (Forms/Letters)

I have a rather large number of already existing forms and letters (in paper
format) that I need to recreate in Reporting Services. After reading a few
posts with regards to formatting etc I have noted that several recommend not
using Text Boxes/Labels but rather tables.
As I'm very new to RS could somebody please advise as to the best possible
way to go about creating these.
Often there is a few lines of text then something that needs to be populated
from the database then another few lines of text etc.
Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 18:03:02 -0700, "Nat Johnson"
<NatJohnson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>I have a rather large number of already existing forms and letters (in paper
>format) that I need to recreate in Reporting Services. After reading a few
>posts with regards to formatting etc I have noted that several recommend not
>using Text Boxes/Labels but rather tables.
>As I'm very new to RS could somebody please advise as to the best possible
>way to go about creating these.
>Often there is a few lines of text then something that needs to be populated
>from the database then another few lines of text etc.
>Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.
>
Nat,
Can you explain more about what you are trying to do (ignoring what
the appropriate software might or might not be).
On the face of it, I suspect that Reporting Services may not be the
optimal solution. But I would prefer to better understand your
objective. Forms, for example, in my terminology are used to collect
data from users. I assume that is not part of your aim?
Andrew Watt
MVP - InfoPath|||The company I work for are creating an application which includes an SQL
database. I have to use RS for the reports that are required. Most of the
reports are the traditional style (eg lineflow looking) but others are
letters or forms that the system will automatically print out if a certain
condition is met.
The forms that will be printed will have parts that will be populated from
the database. The web team for the project are creating the online forms. I
have to make my forms similar to theirs for printing out as once the parts
are populated from db they need to be printed so a user can take them to a
site for hand completion.
Most of the letters that need to be printed out need to get data from the
db. And will be automatically printed by the system when a condition is met.
The normal reports that need to be created are not the problem. My question
really relates to the forms and letters and the formatting of these.
Let me know if this helps you anymore or not.
cheers
Nat
"Andrew Watt [MVP - InfoPath]" wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 18:03:02 -0700, "Nat Johnson"
> <NatJohnson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >I have a rather large number of already existing forms and letters (in paper
> >format) that I need to recreate in Reporting Services. After reading a few
> >posts with regards to formatting etc I have noted that several recommend not
> >using Text Boxes/Labels but rather tables.
> >
> >As I'm very new to RS could somebody please advise as to the best possible
> >way to go about creating these.
> >
> >Often there is a few lines of text then something that needs to be populated
> >from the database then another few lines of text etc.
> >
> >Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.
> >
> Nat,
> Can you explain more about what you are trying to do (ignoring what
> the appropriate software might or might not be).
> On the face of it, I suspect that Reporting Services may not be the
> optimal solution. But I would prefer to better understand your
> objective. Forms, for example, in my terminology are used to collect
> data from users. I assume that is not part of your aim?
> Andrew Watt
> MVP - InfoPath
>|||You should be able to render to PDF and print the PDF documents.
If the documents are to be completed by hand that ought to work for
you.
Almost certainly there will be some tweaking involved to get the
appearance that everybody is happy with.
Andrew Watt
MVP - InfoPath
On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 13:05:03 -0700, "Nat Johnson"
<NatJohnson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>The company I work for are creating an application which includes an SQL
>database. I have to use RS for the reports that are required. Most of the
>reports are the traditional style (eg lineflow looking) but others are
>letters or forms that the system will automatically print out if a certain
>condition is met.
>The forms that will be printed will have parts that will be populated from
>the database. The web team for the project are creating the online forms. I
>have to make my forms similar to theirs for printing out as once the parts
>are populated from db they need to be printed so a user can take them to a
>site for hand completion.
>Most of the letters that need to be printed out need to get data from the
>db. And will be automatically printed by the system when a condition is met.
>The normal reports that need to be created are not the problem. My question
>really relates to the forms and letters and the formatting of these.
>Let me know if this helps you anymore or not.
>cheers
>Nat
>"Andrew Watt [MVP - InfoPath]" wrote:
>> On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 18:03:02 -0700, "Nat Johnson"
>> <NatJohnson@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>> >I have a rather large number of already existing forms and letters (in paper
>> >format) that I need to recreate in Reporting Services. After reading a few
>> >posts with regards to formatting etc I have noted that several recommend not
>> >using Text Boxes/Labels but rather tables.
>> >
>> >As I'm very new to RS could somebody please advise as to the best possible
>> >way to go about creating these.
>> >
>> >Often there is a few lines of text then something that needs to be populated
>> >from the database then another few lines of text etc.
>> >
>> >Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.
>> >
>> Nat,
>> Can you explain more about what you are trying to do (ignoring what
>> the appropriate software might or might not be).
>> On the face of it, I suspect that Reporting Services may not be the
>> optimal solution. But I would prefer to better understand your
>> objective. Forms, for example, in my terminology are used to collect
>> data from users. I assume that is not part of your aim?
>> Andrew Watt
>> MVP - InfoPath

benfit of 64bit windows os for sql 2000

I been reading quite a bit of documentation and am somewhat confused as to
whether or not running SQL 2000 on 64bit Win2k3 is truly beneficial. We
currently run SQL 2000 on Win2k with 8 Gb mem, PAE enabled and configured SQ
L
to use 6 GB via AWE. Performance needs to be better. We've tweaked some SQL
specific settings but have found that SQL needs more memory. We cannot run
64bit SQL due to our application not supporting it. I understand that SQL
2000 will run under WOW on Win2K3 but will this truely offer us any better
performance?The answer is, 'it depends.' Whether or not running SQL2000 SP4 on Windows
Server 2003 x64 edition will give you any performance benefit truly depends
on the characteristics of your workloads. You have to test your app to tell;
I don't know a better way than actually testing.
It's very hard to predict how your specific app will behave in this
configuration from whatever you may read in general whitepapers.
Linchi
"Brian" wrote:

> I been reading quite a bit of documentation and am somewhat confused as to
> whether or not running SQL 2000 on 64bit Win2k3 is truly beneficial. We
> currently run SQL 2000 on Win2k with 8 Gb mem, PAE enabled and configured
SQL
> to use 6 GB via AWE. Performance needs to be better. We've tweaked some SQ
L
> specific settings but have found that SQL needs more memory. We cannot run
> 64bit SQL due to our application not supporting it. I understand that SQL
> 2000 will run under WOW on Win2K3 but will this truely offer us any better
> performance?|||Thanks. I guess its time for some real world testing.
"Linchi Shea" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> The answer is, 'it depends.' Whether or not running SQL2000 SP4 on Windows
> Server 2003 x64 edition will give you any performance benefit truly depend
s
> on the characteristics of your workloads. You have to test your app to tel
l;
> I don't know a better way than actually testing.
> It's very hard to predict how your specific app will behave in this
> configuration from whatever you may read in general whitepapers.
> Linchi
> "Brian" wrote:
>

benfit of 64bit windows os for sql 2000

I been reading quite a bit of documentation and am somewhat confused as to
whether or not running SQL 2000 on 64bit Win2k3 is truly beneficial. We
currently run SQL 2000 on Win2k with 8 Gb mem, PAE enabled and configured SQL
to use 6 GB via AWE. Performance needs to be better. We've tweaked some SQL
specific settings but have found that SQL needs more memory. We cannot run
64bit SQL due to our application not supporting it. I understand that SQL
2000 will run under WOW on Win2K3 but will this truely offer us any better
performance?The answer is, 'it depends.' Whether or not running SQL2000 SP4 on Windows
Server 2003 x64 edition will give you any performance benefit truly depends
on the characteristics of your workloads. You have to test your app to tell;
I don't know a better way than actually testing.
It's very hard to predict how your specific app will behave in this
configuration from whatever you may read in general whitepapers.
Linchi
"Brian" wrote:
> I been reading quite a bit of documentation and am somewhat confused as to
> whether or not running SQL 2000 on 64bit Win2k3 is truly beneficial. We
> currently run SQL 2000 on Win2k with 8 Gb mem, PAE enabled and configured SQL
> to use 6 GB via AWE. Performance needs to be better. We've tweaked some SQL
> specific settings but have found that SQL needs more memory. We cannot run
> 64bit SQL due to our application not supporting it. I understand that SQL
> 2000 will run under WOW on Win2K3 but will this truely offer us any better
> performance?|||Thanks. I guess its time for some real world testing.
"Linchi Shea" wrote:
> The answer is, 'it depends.' Whether or not running SQL2000 SP4 on Windows
> Server 2003 x64 edition will give you any performance benefit truly depends
> on the characteristics of your workloads. You have to test your app to tell;
> I don't know a better way than actually testing.
> It's very hard to predict how your specific app will behave in this
> configuration from whatever you may read in general whitepapers.
> Linchi
> "Brian" wrote:
> > I been reading quite a bit of documentation and am somewhat confused as to
> > whether or not running SQL 2000 on 64bit Win2k3 is truly beneficial. We
> > currently run SQL 2000 on Win2k with 8 Gb mem, PAE enabled and configured SQL
> > to use 6 GB via AWE. Performance needs to be better. We've tweaked some SQL
> > specific settings but have found that SQL needs more memory. We cannot run
> > 64bit SQL due to our application not supporting it. I understand that SQL
> > 2000 will run under WOW on Win2K3 but will this truely offer us any better
> > performance?

Beginner at Backups

I've spent the afternoon reading as much as possible on how to backup and
restore databases except there are a couple of small areas I can't quite get
my head round, so apologies for the beginners question but here goes:
I can set up a disk backup device and then every night run the 'Backup
Database' command to back up our database to a local folder, on top of this
I can run the 'backup log with truncate_only' every 20 minutes to provide
even better restore capability. I have tested these functions and
successfully restored the DB, but in this scenario the backup device is one
file and will simlpy keep growing every day. How can I overcome this? Should
I be creating a new file for every day and then deleting old files? Also,
should each transaction log be backed up to a new file - if not then how do
you know when to start a new backup file for the transaction logs without
the possibility of loosing data?
Cheers, Tom
Hi,
Use the INIT option along with BACKUP database command to reinitialize the
file every time.
Backup database dbname to device_name with INIT
See books online for more detail
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Tom Clark" <tom_clark100@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eTN0zsweEHA.140@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I've spent the afternoon reading as much as possible on how to backup and
> restore databases except there are a couple of small areas I can't quite
get
> my head round, so apologies for the beginners question but here goes:
> I can set up a disk backup device and then every night run the 'Backup
> Database' command to back up our database to a local folder, on top of
this
> I can run the 'backup log with truncate_only' every 20 minutes to provide
> even better restore capability. I have tested these functions and
> successfully restored the DB, but in this scenario the backup device is
one
> file and will simlpy keep growing every day. How can I overcome this?
Should
> I be creating a new file for every day and then deleting old files? Also,
> should each transaction log be backed up to a new file - if not then how
do
> you know when to start a new backup file for the transaction logs without
> the possibility of loosing data?
> Cheers, Tom
>
|||1. With TRUNCATE Only will ONLY truncate the logs (Basically smokes Em)
2. Instead of overwriting the backup file each night, it is fairly typical
to move the OLD Backup to an archive location and save a few previous
backups. OR you can just delete it and replace it with the new backup file.
We typically name our Backup Files with a date time element
...\Backups\DatabaseName\Full\DatabaseNameXX_FULL _MMDDYYYYMMSS.Bak
Where XX is the File Number (We create 4 seperate files for each full backup
to improve backup performance as SQL Server can write to multiple files at
once using multiple threads)
3. We write each transaction backup to a seperate file following the same
naming convention.
...\Backups\DatabaseName\TRXN\DatabaseName_Trnxn_ MMDDYYYYMMSS.Bak
we backup our transaction logs every 15 minutes.
AFTER each successful FULL Backup, we move the Old Transaction Logs to an
Archive Location. in the archive folder we keep 48 hours of logs. We delete
files older than 48 hours.
this may not be perfect, but it works for us and is a good start for you.
Cheers,
Greg Jackson
PDX, Oregon
|||Cheers Greg, this was exactly the kind of answer I was after!
Thinking on though, if you had to do a restore and then apply all the logs
up to the last log backup, would you do this by script (or apply each
transaction log by hand) and if so how? The testing I've done has only been
with a small number of log files and so I have applied them one by one.
"Jaxon" <GregoryAJackson@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eb68X3weEHA.4068@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> 1. With TRUNCATE Only will ONLY truncate the logs (Basically smokes Em)
> 2. Instead of overwriting the backup file each night, it is fairly
typical
> to move the OLD Backup to an archive location and save a few previous
> backups. OR you can just delete it and replace it with the new backup
file.
> We typically name our Backup Files with a date time element
> ...\Backups\DatabaseName\Full\DatabaseNameXX_FULL_ MMDDYYYYMMSS.Bak
> Where XX is the File Number (We create 4 seperate files for each full
backup
> to improve backup performance as SQL Server can write to multiple files at
> once using multiple threads)
> 3. We write each transaction backup to a seperate file following the same
> naming convention.
> ...\Backups\DatabaseName\TRXN\DatabaseName_Trnxn_M MDDYYYYMMSS.Bak
> we backup our transaction logs every 15 minutes.
> AFTER each successful FULL Backup, we move the Old Transaction Logs to an
> Archive Location. in the archive folder we keep 48 hours of logs. We
delete
> files older than 48 hours.
>
> this may not be perfect, but it works for us and is a good start for you.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Greg Jackson
> PDX, Oregon
>
|||you can do it by hand or by script if you wanted.
I've actually done it by hand most often in past.
GAJ

Beginner at Backups

I've spent the afternoon reading as much as possible on how to backup and
restore databases except there are a couple of small areas I can't quite get
my head round, so apologies for the beginners question but here goes:
I can set up a disk backup device and then every night run the 'Backup
Database' command to back up our database to a local folder, on top of this
I can run the 'backup log with truncate_only' every 20 minutes to provide
even better restore capability. I have tested these functions and
successfully restored the DB, but in this scenario the backup device is one
file and will simlpy keep growing every day. How can I overcome this? Should
I be creating a new file for every day and then deleting old files? Also,
should each transaction log be backed up to a new file - if not then how do
you know when to start a new backup file for the transaction logs without
the possibility of loosing data?
Cheers, TomHi,
Use the INIT option along with BACKUP database command to reinitialize the
file every time.
Backup database dbname to device_name with INIT
See books online for more detail
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Tom Clark" <tom_clark100@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eTN0zsweEHA.140@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I've spent the afternoon reading as much as possible on how to backup and
> restore databases except there are a couple of small areas I can't quite
get
> my head round, so apologies for the beginners question but here goes:
> I can set up a disk backup device and then every night run the 'Backup
> Database' command to back up our database to a local folder, on top of
this
> I can run the 'backup log with truncate_only' every 20 minutes to provide
> even better restore capability. I have tested these functions and
> successfully restored the DB, but in this scenario the backup device is
one
> file and will simlpy keep growing every day. How can I overcome this?
Should
> I be creating a new file for every day and then deleting old files? Also,
> should each transaction log be backed up to a new file - if not then how
do
> you know when to start a new backup file for the transaction logs without
> the possibility of loosing data?
> Cheers, Tom
>|||1. With TRUNCATE Only will ONLY truncate the logs (Basically smokes Em)
2. Instead of overwriting the backup file each night, it is fairly typical
to move the OLD Backup to an archive location and save a few previous
backups. OR you can just delete it and replace it with the new backup file.
We typically name our Backup Files with a date time element
... \Backups\DatabaseName\Full\DatabaseNameX
X_FULL_MMDDYYYYMMSS.Bak
Where XX is the File Number (We create 4 seperate files for each full backup
to improve backup performance as SQL Server can write to multiple files at
once using multiple threads)
3. We write each transaction backup to a seperate file following the same
naming convention.
... \Backups\DatabaseName\TRXN\DatabaseName_
Trnxn_MMDDYYYYMMSS.Bak
we backup our transaction logs every 15 minutes.
AFTER each successful FULL Backup, we move the Old Transaction Logs to an
Archive Location. in the archive folder we keep 48 hours of logs. We delete
files older than 48 hours.
this may not be perfect, but it works for us and is a good start for you.
Cheers,
Greg Jackson
PDX, Oregon|||Cheers Greg, this was exactly the kind of answer I was after!
Thinking on though, if you had to do a restore and then apply all the logs
up to the last log backup, would you do this by script (or apply each
transaction log by hand) and if so how? The testing I've done has only been
with a small number of log files and so I have applied them one by one.
"Jaxon" <GregoryAJackson@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eb68X3weEHA.4068@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> 1. With TRUNCATE Only will ONLY truncate the logs (Basically smokes Em)
> 2. Instead of overwriting the backup file each night, it is fairly
typical
> to move the OLD Backup to an archive location and save a few previous
> backups. OR you can just delete it and replace it with the new backup
file.
> We typically name our Backup Files with a date time element
> ... \Backups\DatabaseName\Full\DatabaseNameX
X_FULL_MMDDYYYYMMSS.Bak
> Where XX is the File Number (We create 4 seperate files for each full
backup
> to improve backup performance as SQL Server can write to multiple files at
> once using multiple threads)
> 3. We write each transaction backup to a seperate file following the same
> naming convention.
> ... \Backups\DatabaseName\TRXN\DatabaseName_
Trnxn_MMDDYYYYMMSS.Bak
> we backup our transaction logs every 15 minutes.
> AFTER each successful FULL Backup, we move the Old Transaction Logs to an
> Archive Location. in the archive folder we keep 48 hours of logs. We
delete
> files older than 48 hours.
>
> this may not be perfect, but it works for us and is a good start for you.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Greg Jackson
> PDX, Oregon
>|||you can do it by hand or by script if you wanted.
I've actually done it by hand most often in past.
GAJ

Beginner at Backups

I've spent the afternoon reading as much as possible on how to backup and
restore databases except there are a couple of small areas I can't quite get
my head round, so apologies for the beginners question but here goes:
I can set up a disk backup device and then every night run the 'Backup
Database' command to back up our database to a local folder, on top of this
I can run the 'backup log with truncate_only' every 20 minutes to provide
even better restore capability. I have tested these functions and
successfully restored the DB, but in this scenario the backup device is one
file and will simlpy keep growing every day. How can I overcome this? Should
I be creating a new file for every day and then deleting old files? Also,
should each transaction log be backed up to a new file - if not then how do
you know when to start a new backup file for the transaction logs without
the possibility of loosing data?
Cheers, TomHi,
Use the INIT option along with BACKUP database command to reinitialize the
file every time.
Backup database dbname to device_name with INIT
See books online for more detail
Thanks
Hari
MCDBA
"Tom Clark" <tom_clark100@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eTN0zsweEHA.140@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I've spent the afternoon reading as much as possible on how to backup and
> restore databases except there are a couple of small areas I can't quite
get
> my head round, so apologies for the beginners question but here goes:
> I can set up a disk backup device and then every night run the 'Backup
> Database' command to back up our database to a local folder, on top of
this
> I can run the 'backup log with truncate_only' every 20 minutes to provide
> even better restore capability. I have tested these functions and
> successfully restored the DB, but in this scenario the backup device is
one
> file and will simlpy keep growing every day. How can I overcome this?
Should
> I be creating a new file for every day and then deleting old files? Also,
> should each transaction log be backed up to a new file - if not then how
do
> you know when to start a new backup file for the transaction logs without
> the possibility of loosing data?
> Cheers, Tom
>|||1. With TRUNCATE Only will ONLY truncate the logs (Basically smokes Em)
2. Instead of overwriting the backup file each night, it is fairly typical
to move the OLD Backup to an archive location and save a few previous
backups. OR you can just delete it and replace it with the new backup file.
We typically name our Backup Files with a date time element
...\Backups\DatabaseName\Full\DatabaseNameXX_FULL_MMDDYYYYMMSS.Bak
Where XX is the File Number (We create 4 seperate files for each full backup
to improve backup performance as SQL Server can write to multiple files at
once using multiple threads)
3. We write each transaction backup to a seperate file following the same
naming convention.
...\Backups\DatabaseName\TRXN\DatabaseName_Trnxn_MMDDYYYYMMSS.Bak
we backup our transaction logs every 15 minutes.
AFTER each successful FULL Backup, we move the Old Transaction Logs to an
Archive Location. in the archive folder we keep 48 hours of logs. We delete
files older than 48 hours.
this may not be perfect, but it works for us and is a good start for you.
Cheers,
Greg Jackson
PDX, Oregon|||Cheers Greg, this was exactly the kind of answer I was after!
Thinking on though, if you had to do a restore and then apply all the logs
up to the last log backup, would you do this by script (or apply each
transaction log by hand) and if so how? The testing I've done has only been
with a small number of log files and so I have applied them one by one.
"Jaxon" <GregoryAJackson@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eb68X3weEHA.4068@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> 1. With TRUNCATE Only will ONLY truncate the logs (Basically smokes Em)
> 2. Instead of overwriting the backup file each night, it is fairly
typical
> to move the OLD Backup to an archive location and save a few previous
> backups. OR you can just delete it and replace it with the new backup
file.
> We typically name our Backup Files with a date time element
> ...\Backups\DatabaseName\Full\DatabaseNameXX_FULL_MMDDYYYYMMSS.Bak
> Where XX is the File Number (We create 4 seperate files for each full
backup
> to improve backup performance as SQL Server can write to multiple files at
> once using multiple threads)
> 3. We write each transaction backup to a seperate file following the same
> naming convention.
> ...\Backups\DatabaseName\TRXN\DatabaseName_Trnxn_MMDDYYYYMMSS.Bak
> we backup our transaction logs every 15 minutes.
> AFTER each successful FULL Backup, we move the Old Transaction Logs to an
> Archive Location. in the archive folder we keep 48 hours of logs. We
delete
> files older than 48 hours.
>
> this may not be perfect, but it works for us and is a good start for you.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Greg Jackson
> PDX, Oregon
>|||you can do it by hand or by script if you wanted.
I've actually done it by hand most often in past.
GAJ

Becoming an mvp

I was reading about how people become MVP's and it states participate in the MSDN forums, is this true ?

EDIT: Why did you lock this thread, it is specific to becoming an MVP in reporting services. Kind of ignorant on your part.

This isn't the right place to ask those kind of questions as we try to keep it to software development discussion only. You should have a look at this site

http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/mvpexecsum

|||

Thanks for the unlock, looks like its more than just answering questions

on this forum.

Jon

|||

I hope you understand that your question does not really fall under the topic SQL Server Reporting Services development discussion, these are MSDN forums after all. Your question is answered on the MVP support site.

http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/mvpfaqs

Q1: What is the Microsoft MVP award?

A1: The Microsoft Most Valuable Professional (MVP) Award is an annual award that is given to outstanding members of Microsoft's peer-to-peer communities, and is based on the past year's contributions those members make in those communities online and offline.

|||

I understand but it had to do with reporting services and becoming an MVP in that.

|||

Andreas Johansson wrote:

Q1: What is the Microsoft MVP award?

A1: The Microsoft Most Valuable Professional (MVP) Award is an annual award that is given to outstanding members of Microsoft's peer-to-peer communities, and is based on the past year's contributions those members make in those communities online and offline.

I would also like to point out that it is not just simply a matter of simply sitting on a forum answering all the questions you can - you also have to be nominated either by other MVPs, or by other people who are recognised as being competent in the subject area, and you also normally have to present at user group meetings, etc.

sluggy