best tutorial for sql reporting service 2005

i am asked to develop a web application where i have to display reports in a seperate window from a hyperlink .i have to display the report in grid format and show a pie chart within the report layout .

i need to give user credential like print,save the report in excel or doc format and email report.

can anybody give the links for the best tutorial to achieve my purpose.

thanks

sally

Hi there,

There are many resources available. Try books online.

Here is a great guide to building a report.

http://www.eggheadcafe.com/articles/20040823.asp

Here is a guide to building a report + a web interface.

http://www.15seconds.com/Issue/041013.htm

Try MS downloads for further samples.

cheers,

Andrew

|||

Reporting Services Tutorials >>> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms170246.aspx

Best practices for an installation of SQL Server 2000 Reporting Se

Hi,
Where would one install SQL Service 2000 Reporting Services? I though about
installing them on a Web Server (with NO local SQL Server installed on) and
connection remote to a SQL Server 2000. Does this approach make sense?
I donâ't have a good feeling installing the Web Services on a Database Server
where I have to install IIS and the .NET Framework as well.
Best regards,
DanielThis will work fine. One point to keep in mind is that you have to have a
SQL Server license on the box with RS.
What I do is have SQL Server just for RS on the box. The data the reports
are based on reside on a different box. My feeling is why not have SQL
Server for the object caching that RS uses it for be on the same box. I have
to pay for it anyway.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"Daniel Walzenbach" <daniel.walzenbach@.newsgroup.nospam> wrote in message
news:A0462F4B-9A38-4B88-B2DB-C42B6514EF8B@.microsoft.com...
> Hi,
> Where would one install SQL Service 2000 Reporting Services? I though
> about
> installing them on a Web Server (with NO local SQL Server installed on)
> and
> connection remote to a SQL Server 2000. Does this approach make sense?
> I don't have a good feeling installing the Web Services on a Database
> Server
> where I have to install IIS and the .NET Framework as well.
> Best regards,
> Daniel|||Bruce,
Thanks for your answer! Just to make sure I got your point. You suggest to
have both (SQL Server and RS) installed on the same computer? Am I also right
that this constellation would only require on SQL Server license?
And one more question: Can RS be installed on a computer with NO SQL Server
installed? I had some troulbe installing RS on my Web Server where on SQL
Server is installed on. The installation skipped the part where I am supposed
to select the SQL Server but told me all is fine :-( This problem though
could have been caused by the Terminal Services which I had not disabled
(Will try tomorrow).
Thanks!
Daniel
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
> This will work fine. One point to keep in mind is that you have to have a
> SQL Server license on the box with RS.
> What I do is have SQL Server just for RS on the box. The data the reports
> are based on reside on a different box. My feeling is why not have SQL
> Server for the object caching that RS uses it for be on the same box. I have
> to pay for it anyway.
>
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> "Daniel Walzenbach" <daniel.walzenbach@.newsgroup.nospam> wrote in message
> news:A0462F4B-9A38-4B88-B2DB-C42B6514EF8B@.microsoft.com...
> > Hi,
> >
> > Where would one install SQL Service 2000 Reporting Services? I though
> > about
> > installing them on a Web Server (with NO local SQL Server installed on)
> > and
> > connection remote to a SQL Server 2000. Does this approach make sense?
> >
> > I don't have a good feeling installing the Web Services on a Database
> > Server
> > where I have to install IIS and the .NET Framework as well.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Daniel
>
>|||From a licensing perspective there is no difference. You have to have a SQL
Server license for the box that has Reporting Services. Reporting Services
uses SQL Server for it's object storage. For instance, all reports are
stored in the database. You will not see any rdl files on the server. It
uses SQL Server for other objects as well. So, RS has to have SQL Server
somewhere. If you use a SQL Server that is somewhere other than the box you
are installing RS on you have to use the command line install and specify
where SQL Server can be found. I have not done this myself. I assume the
info on how to do this is in the readme. If you use the setup program it
plans that SQL Server is on the box you are installing RS.
Bruce Loehle-Conger
MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
"Daniel Walzenbach" <daniel.walzenbach@.newsgroup.nospam> wrote in message
news:E02F3FE4-EDD4-4A35-AD4D-D772A811424A@.microsoft.com...
> Bruce,
> Thanks for your answer! Just to make sure I got your point. You suggest to
> have both (SQL Server and RS) installed on the same computer? Am I also
> right
> that this constellation would only require on SQL Server license?
> And one more question: Can RS be installed on a computer with NO SQL
> Server
> installed? I had some troulbe installing RS on my Web Server where on SQL
> Server is installed on. The installation skipped the part where I am
> supposed
> to select the SQL Server but told me all is fine :-( This problem though
> could have been caused by the Terminal Services which I had not disabled
> (Will try tomorrow).
> Thanks!
> Daniel
>
> "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> This will work fine. One point to keep in mind is that you have to have a
>> SQL Server license on the box with RS.
>> What I do is have SQL Server just for RS on the box. The data the reports
>> are based on reside on a different box. My feeling is why not have SQL
>> Server for the object caching that RS uses it for be on the same box. I
>> have
>> to pay for it anyway.
>>
>> --
>> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> "Daniel Walzenbach" <daniel.walzenbach@.newsgroup.nospam> wrote in message
>> news:A0462F4B-9A38-4B88-B2DB-C42B6514EF8B@.microsoft.com...
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Where would one install SQL Service 2000 Reporting Services? I though
>> > about
>> > installing them on a Web Server (with NO local SQL Server installed on)
>> > and
>> > connection remote to a SQL Server 2000. Does this approach make sense?
>> >
>> > I don't have a good feeling installing the Web Services on a Database
>> > Server
>> > where I have to install IIS and the .NET Framework as well.
>> >
>> > Best regards,
>> >
>> > Daniel
>>|||Thank you Bruce,
this is good to know!
Daniel
"Bruce L-C [MVP]" <bruce_lcNOSPAM@.hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:%238AtkHJYFHA.2796@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> From a licensing perspective there is no difference. You have to have a
> SQL Server license for the box that has Reporting Services. Reporting
> Services uses SQL Server for it's object storage. For instance, all
> reports are stored in the database. You will not see any rdl files on the
> server. It uses SQL Server for other objects as well. So, RS has to have
> SQL Server somewhere. If you use a SQL Server that is somewhere other than
> the box you are installing RS on you have to use the command line install
> and specify where SQL Server can be found. I have not done this myself. I
> assume the info on how to do this is in the readme. If you use the setup
> program it plans that SQL Server is on the box you are installing RS.
>
> --
> Bruce Loehle-Conger
> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
> "Daniel Walzenbach" <daniel.walzenbach@.newsgroup.nospam> wrote in message
> news:E02F3FE4-EDD4-4A35-AD4D-D772A811424A@.microsoft.com...
>> Bruce,
>> Thanks for your answer! Just to make sure I got your point. You suggest
>> to
>> have both (SQL Server and RS) installed on the same computer? Am I also
>> right
>> that this constellation would only require on SQL Server license?
>> And one more question: Can RS be installed on a computer with NO SQL
>> Server
>> installed? I had some troulbe installing RS on my Web Server where on SQL
>> Server is installed on. The installation skipped the part where I am
>> supposed
>> to select the SQL Server but told me all is fine :-( This problem though
>> could have been caused by the Terminal Services which I had not disabled
>> (Will try tomorrow).
>> Thanks!
>> Daniel
>>
>> "Bruce L-C [MVP]" wrote:
>> This will work fine. One point to keep in mind is that you have to have
>> a
>> SQL Server license on the box with RS.
>> What I do is have SQL Server just for RS on the box. The data the
>> reports
>> are based on reside on a different box. My feeling is why not have SQL
>> Server for the object caching that RS uses it for be on the same box. I
>> have
>> to pay for it anyway.
>>
>> --
>> Bruce Loehle-Conger
>> MVP SQL Server Reporting Services
>> "Daniel Walzenbach" <daniel.walzenbach@.newsgroup.nospam> wrote in
>> message
>> news:A0462F4B-9A38-4B88-B2DB-C42B6514EF8B@.microsoft.com...
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Where would one install SQL Service 2000 Reporting Services? I though
>> > about
>> > installing them on a Web Server (with NO local SQL Server installed
>> > on)
>> > and
>> > connection remote to a SQL Server 2000. Does this approach make sense?
>> >
>> > I don't have a good feeling installing the Web Services on a Database
>> > Server
>> > where I have to install IIS and the .NET Framework as well.
>> >
>> > Best regards,
>> >
>> > Daniel
>>
>|||" If you use a SQL Server that is somewhere other than the box you
are installing RS on you have to use the command line install and specify
where SQL Server can be found."-Bruce
Are you absolutely 100% certain this is the case?
I'm certainly stuck trying to install enterprise RS on the web server
pointing to a SQL server DB on another sql server(2000). Problem is the
install ends "successfully" but then throws an activivation error. No
resolution for this error in sight.
However if I MUST use the commend line too to configure RS across servers
this may explain the activiation error. I don't remember finding anything
documented telling me I must use this command line approach.
Please verify this is true. Thanks! Could save a lot of headaches...

Best Practices Analyzer contradicts BOL for SQLSERVERAGENT

The 2005 Best Practices Analyzer (July 2007) contradicts Books Online about what account to run SQLSERVERAGENT under.

BPA says use Network Service Account, BOL explicitly says not to use Network Service Account:

BPA gives a warning saying "SQL Server Service [MY-PC\SQLSERVERAGENT] In Unrecommended Account On Host [MY-PC]. We recommend that the service [SQLSERVERAGENT] on host [MY-PC] be run under Network Service Account. Currently it is designated to run under the account [SOMEDOMAIN\someaccount]."

BooksOnline says "Security Note: Because multiple services can use the Network Service account, it is difficult to control which services have access to network resources, including SQL Server databases. We do not recommend using the Network Service account for the SQL Server Agent service."

So who's right ? BPA or BOL ?

Books online is correct - a non-system account provides more control over access, security.

Just curious...which version of BPA are you running?

-Sue

sql

Best Practice guidelines

Hi All,

We have an application requirement for a database supporting field service engineers, which calls for a central SQL Server databse, and laptops with the same database replicated onto SQL Express. I'm resposible for designing the database for this, physical and logical. I've designed and built many a database, but never had to use replication before.

I've read through BOL, and understand how the merge replication process works, and I have no problem designing the database assuming it were to run on a single server.

What I am trying to find are whitepapers, or equivalent, on "best design and implementation practice", and especialy common mistakes to avoid.

I know that the windows programmers responsible for the UI will not completely abstract the database from the code (no matter how desirable that is or how often I tell them!), and I really don't want to find I have to change the physical tables or replication logic after they've coded most of the UI .

Many thanks in advance

Richard R

I would say depending on the features you plan to use, Books Online s your best friend.

Let us know if that doesnt help you much and also let us know what specific feature areas you are looking at.

|||

Hi,

BOL is pretty good at describing the process, but doesn't list any caveats. It may of course be that there aren't any - but that would be unusual!

The main question I supppose is, can I just get on and design the system as if it were stand-alone, then build the replication parts afterwards?

I expect I will need some custom logic for reconcilliation, as there has to be a log for tracking part movements, and it is likely that users will synchronise their laptops in a different order to them physically moving the parts, thus generating gaps in the log that need to be filled, as well as there local copy of the data not reflecting the physical reality when they come to move parts.

Is there a best practice for doing this sort of thing without bothering the users?

Thanks for your help,

Richard

Best method to access web service

We have a billing web service where you passs in the account and amount and get returned an XML string with result.

I had suggested that I open up an endpoint and have the service listen for messages but the programming team wont go for it.

What is the best method for me to call an external web service? I have tried sp_OACreate and run into memory leaks and have not had much luck with assemblies. See http://www.codeproject.com/script/comments/forums.asp?forumid=1725&select=2180035&df=100&msg=2180035

The best method should be assemblies, follow the old post from Vineet: http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlclr/archive/2005/07/25/Vineet.aspx, it shows how to explictly generate the serialization code If I remeber correctly the problem is that the default option for Visual studio projects is to generate code that creates the serialization at runtime, invoking csc.exe on the fly, which clearly won't work for SQL assemblies.

Openning an endpoint (I asumme an HTTP endpoint) won't solve your problem, that is available only for incomming calls (an app can access your SQL endpoint as an WS call) and my understanding is that you want to do it the other way (have a SQL procedure invoke a WS)

Best design for a service that will monitor db

We have an existing database that is constantly receiving updated
information on the status and attributes of specific objects within the
application in batches. As these records come in, there is portions of the
table that they populate that are intentionally left empty, because the data
for these fields is retrieved from a seperate Java application through a
published web service (on same network). We are constructing a .Net service
which will handle the retrieval of records from the Java app and push the
new data into the relevant fields.
We are currently designing the .NET service to check the database on a
predefined interval, to see if any new records have appeared that need to be
looked up in the Java application. However, it would be preferable (at
least for testing) if this interaction could be designed so that the Sql
Server 2000 database could notify the .Net service that a new batch of
records has arrived (push instead of pull). Does anyone have any knowledge
if there is a means by which this can be accomplished?
Thanks.Hmmm ... There surely is a notificaiton service in SQL Server but as far as
I've read the documentation it maynot be suitable for this problem ...
But I think you can write a trigger that can call a DTS package or a Jobs
framework to do this notification ... I think this can also be one solution
...
--
HTH,
Vinod Kumar
MCSE, DBA, MCAD
http://www.extremeexperts.com
"nfalconer" <navid@.gci.net> wrote in message
news:vm4o27o29cu596@.corp.supernews.com...
> We have an existing database that is constantly receiving updated
> information on the status and attributes of specific objects within the
> application in batches. As these records come in, there is portions of
the
> table that they populate that are intentionally left empty, because the
data
> for these fields is retrieved from a seperate Java application through a
> published web service (on same network). We are constructing a .Net
service
> which will handle the retrieval of records from the Java app and push the
> new data into the relevant fields.
> We are currently designing the .NET service to check the database on a
> predefined interval, to see if any new records have appeared that need to
be
> looked up in the Java application. However, it would be preferable (at
> least for testing) if this interaction could be designed so that the Sql
> Server 2000 database could notify the .Net service that a new batch of
> records has arrived (push instead of pull). Does anyone have any
knowledge
> if there is a means by which this can be accomplished?
> Thanks.
>