Showing posts with label document. Show all posts
Showing posts with label document. Show all posts

Thursday, March 22, 2012

Digitally Signing

I have two questions.

1. Has anyone ever digitally signed a PDF coming out of Reporting Services?
2. When will you be able to generate a Word document from a Reporting Services Report?

Dave

Currently there is no real way to sign a PDF in the true sense of the word - The best you can really do is generate a hash off of the fully rendered PDF and then store the hash somewhere else...later you can use the hash to make sure the report hasn't been modified.

There is no ETA on SSRS being able to render to Word...SoftArtisans has a product which will do this now, though (http://officewriter.softartisans.com/)

Friday, March 9, 2012

Different XML elements on the same level?

I would like to generate an XML document using SQL Server 2000's explicit option.

I want something like this for my output:

<root>
<someNode1>
<someNode2 />
</someNode1>
<someNode3>
<someNode4 />
</someNode3>
</root>

The problem is that I end up getting an "originally declared" node being "redeclared" as something else error. In this case, someNode1 is "redeclared" as someNode3. It looks as though it's not possible to create two different elements on the same level. I've not found any samples in documentation that show such a scenario. Anybody have a solution or hack? It seems like this kind of output would be common in the business world.

TIA,

Ian

Hi there,

I'm no expert on this but came across your post whilst being up against a similar problem.

This URL helped me out: http://www.ianywhere.com/developer/product_manuals/sqlanywhere/0902/en/html/dbugen9/00000535.htm

This is a working example derived from something I am working on myself:

SELECT
1 AS Tag,
NULL AS Parent,
1 AS [Item!1!Id],
'Item' AS [Item!1!Name],
1 AS [Item!1!ParentId],
NULL AS [NutritionalBreakdown!2!Calories!element],
NULL AS [NutritionalBreakdown!2!Protein!element]

UNION ALL

SELECT
2,
1,
NULL,
NULL,
NULL,
'test calorie data',
'test protein data'

ORDER BY Tag
FOR XML EXPLICIT

Produces:

<Item Id="1" Name="Item" ParentId="1">

<NutritionalBreakdown>

<Calories>test calorie data</Calories>

<Protein>test protein data</Protein>

</NutritionalBreakdown>

</Item>

Hope that helps!

Different XML elements on the same level?

I would like to generate an XML document using SQL Server 2000's explicit option.

I want something like this for my output:

<root>
<someNode1>
<someNode2 />
</someNode1>
<someNode3>
<someNode4 />
</someNode3>
</root>

The problem is that I end up getting an "originally declared" node being "redeclared" as something else error. In this case, someNode1 is "redeclared" as someNode3. It looks as though it's not possible to create two different elements on the same level. I've not found any samples in documentation that show such a scenario. Anybody have a solution or hack? It seems like this kind of output would be common in the business world.

TIA,

Ian

Hi there,

I'm no expert on this but came across your post whilst being up against a similar problem.

This URL helped me out: http://www.ianywhere.com/developer/product_manuals/sqlanywhere/0902/en/html/dbugen9/00000535.htm

This is a working example derived from something I am working on myself:

SELECT
1 AS Tag,
NULL AS Parent,
1 AS [Item!1!Id],
'Item' AS [Item!1!Name],
1 AS [Item!1!ParentId],
NULL AS [NutritionalBreakdown!2!Calories!element],
NULL AS [NutritionalBreakdown!2!Protein!element]

UNION ALL

SELECT
2,
1,
NULL,
NULL,
NULL,
'test calorie data',
'test protein data'

ORDER BY Tag
FOR XML EXPLICIT

Produces:

<Item Id="1" Name="Item" ParentId="1">

<NutritionalBreakdown>

<Calories>test calorie data</Calories>

<Protein>test protein data</Protein>

</NutritionalBreakdown>

</Item>

Hope that helps!

Friday, February 17, 2012

Different behavior between VS and IE in rendering reports with fixed headers and a document map

I apologize in advance if this is something already addressed elsewhere (if so - please point me in that direction).

I have created a really simple report that allows 'drill-down' at the group level. To this report I also selected the 'Repeat header rows on each page' and 'Header should remain visible while scrolling' features and all worked as expected after deploying.

I then added a Document Map referencing the group level and that too worked within the VS environment. VS displayed a page that contained the requested group in plain view and I could 'drill down' as expected.

But when I deployed the report and subsequently pulled it up in IE I noticed a slightly different behavior in that when selecting an entry from the document map, the start of that group got hidden behind the fixed header such that what was visible was perhaps 1 or 2 group records down. I had to scroll up to see the start of the group I had selected from the document map and then drill down from there.

Removing both the "Repeat header..." and "Header should remain ...." allows me to select a group from the document map (which is always at the top) - but in doing so I lose the fixed header feature.

Does anyone have any ideas what I am doing wrong?

Bob

I am experiencing this same problem as well. I would also like to know if there is a fix or workaround to this.|||I also have an issue with a similar setup. The report works well in VS 05, after deplying the document map displays a short list of entries, I'm unable to navigate to the bottom of the document map listing and I cannot "type ahead" as in VS environment.

Different behavior between VS and IE in rendering reports with fixed headers and a document map

I apologize in advance if this is something already addressed elsewhere (if so - please point me in that direction).

I have created a really simple report that allows 'drill-down' at the group level. To this report I also selected the 'Repeat header rows on each page' and 'Header should remain visible while scrolling' features and all worked as expected after deploying.

I then added a Document Map referencing the group level and that too worked within the VS environment. VS displayed a page that contained the requested group in plain view and I could 'drill down' as expected.

But when I deployed the report and subsequently pulled it up in IE I noticed a slightly different behavior in that when selecting an entry from the document map, the start of that group got hidden behind the fixed header such that what was visible was perhaps 1 or 2 group records down. I had to scroll up to see the start of the group I had selected from the document map and then drill down from there.

Removing both the "Repeat header..." and "Header should remain ...." allows me to select a group from the document map (which is always at the top) - but in doing so I lose the fixed header feature.

Does anyone have any ideas what I am doing wrong?

Bob

I am experiencing this same problem as well. I would also like to know if there is a fix or workaround to this.

Different behavior between VS and IE in rendering reports with fixed headers and a document map

I apologize in advance if this is something already addressed elsewhere (if so - please point me in that direction).

I have created a really simple report that allows 'drill-down' at the group level. To this report I also selected the 'Repeat header rows on each page' and 'Header should remain visible while scrolling' features and all worked as expected after deploying.

I then added a Document Map referencing the group level and that too worked within the VS environment. VS displayed a page that contained the requested group in plain view and I could 'drill down' as expected.

But when I deployed the report and subsequently pulled it up in IE I noticed a slightly different behavior in that when selecting an entry from the document map, the start of that group got hidden behind the fixed header such that what was visible was perhaps 1 or 2 group records down. I had to scroll up to see the start of the group I had selected from the document map and then drill down from there.

Removing both the "Repeat header..." and "Header should remain ...." allows me to select a group from the document map (which is always at the top) - but in doing so I lose the fixed header feature.

Does anyone have any ideas what I am doing wrong?

Bob

I am experiencing this same problem as well. I would also like to know if there is a fix or workaround to this.|||I also have an issue with a similar setup. The report works well in VS 05, after deplying the document map displays a short list of entries, I'm unable to navigate to the bottom of the document map listing and I cannot "type ahead" as in VS environment.

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Differences between SQL 7 and SQL 2000

Hi friends, Anyone can bring me a document describing the differences and new
features between SQL 7 and SQL2000?
Thanks all!Hi,
A lot of differences:-
1. Recovery models
2. Automated Logshipping
3. UDF
4. Multiple instances of SQL Server running in paralel
5. Instead of Triggers
6. Memory (64 GB) and 32 Processor support
The list goes on...
See the topic "Relational database enhancements" in Books online.
Thanks
hari
SQL Server MVP
"Tinchos" <Tinchos@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9C4EF0D9-CB89-47B9-B9F5-CF208C04E0E9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi friends, Anyone can bring me a document describing the differences and
> new
> features between SQL 7 and SQL2000?
> Thanks all!|||If you are thinking about upgrading from 7.0 you might as well bypass 2000
and go straight to 2005. It will be out soon enough.
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/2005/default.mspx
--
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Tinchos" <Tinchos@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9C4EF0D9-CB89-47B9-B9F5-CF208C04E0E9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi friends, Anyone can bring me a document describing the differences and
> new
> features between SQL 7 and SQL2000?
> Thanks all!

Differences between SQL 7 and SQL 2000

Hi friends, Anyone can bring me a document describing the differences and ne
w
features between SQL 7 and SQL2000?
Thanks all!Hi,
A lot of differences:-
1. Recovery models
2. Automated Logshipping
3. UDF
4. Multiple instances of SQL Server running in paralel
5. Instead of Triggers
6. Memory (64 GB) and 32 Processor support
The list goes on...
See the topic "Relational database enhancements" in Books online.
Thanks
hari
SQL Server MVP
"Tinchos" <Tinchos@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9C4EF0D9-CB89-47B9-B9F5-CF208C04E0E9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi friends, Anyone can bring me a document describing the differences and
> new
> features between SQL 7 and SQL2000?
> Thanks all!|||If you are thinking about upgrading from 7.0 you might as well bypass 2000
and go straight to 2005. It will be out soon enough.
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/2005/default.mspx
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Tinchos" <Tinchos@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9C4EF0D9-CB89-47B9-B9F5-CF208C04E0E9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi friends, Anyone can bring me a document describing the differences and
> new
> features between SQL 7 and SQL2000?
> Thanks all!

Differences between SQL 7 and SQL 2000

Hi friends, Anyone can bring me a document describing the differences and new
features between SQL 7 and SQL2000?
Thanks all!
Hi,
A lot of differences:-
1. Recovery models
2. Automated Logshipping
3. UDF
4. Multiple instances of SQL Server running in paralel
5. Instead of Triggers
6. Memory (64 GB) and 32 Processor support
The list goes on...
See the topic "Relational database enhancements" in Books online.
Thanks
hari
SQL Server MVP
"Tinchos" <Tinchos@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9C4EF0D9-CB89-47B9-B9F5-CF208C04E0E9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi friends, Anyone can bring me a document describing the differences and
> new
> features between SQL 7 and SQL2000?
> Thanks all!
|||If you are thinking about upgrading from 7.0 you might as well bypass 2000
and go straight to 2005. It will be out soon enough.
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/2005/default.mspx
Andrew J. Kelly SQL MVP
"Tinchos" <Tinchos@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9C4EF0D9-CB89-47B9-B9F5-CF208C04E0E9@.microsoft.com...
> Hi friends, Anyone can bring me a document describing the differences and
> new
> features between SQL 7 and SQL2000?
> Thanks all!