I have some heavy queries in my server and I want to copy the full query (more than 1024 characters).
But the field from view pg_stat_activity dont show me more than 2014.
I saw that I can change the postgres server parameter track_activity_query_size, but I dont want to restart my server to apply it, and I am not sure if it works really. So, there is another table, view, function, or something I want to find it? The full execution query.
Thanks!
All the views and functions that show the query string only seep a maximum of track_activity_query_size characters.
Unless you want to use the log file, as "a horse with no name" suggested, you'll have to restart the server.
Related
I have a relatively complex SQL query (complex to run in Access) and want to run it in MS Access. It works with the pass-through query well but going forward I will face an issue that is related to a filter I apply in the query. I select the current report date within the where function. Below is a part of my query I try to handle ;
select LS.PID_FACILITY, LS.ASOF_DTE, LS.DATA_CYCLE_FLG, LS.CUST_ACC, LS.CUST_SMUN, LS.CUST_NME, LS.CUST_CTY,
WHERE LS.ASOF_DTE='19-SEP-22'
I do not want to change asof_dte filter manually everyday. If this was a normal access query I could join another table that includes only the current report date. But I cannot do it in a pass-through query. What is the alternative way to do it? I read something about creating variables or strings, but I could not relate them to my problem, since I am a beginner at creating such solutions.
Thank you all.
Well, two VERY intresting things here.
First, YES a great idea to include the date in the PT query. But, you don't want to change that date each time.
Soluton:
Add a paramter to the query, and then from Access code add that paramter. It is VERY easy to do this (one line of code!!! - don't adopt the zillion examples out there that has a boatload of ADO code - NOT required!.
However, BEFORE we start dealing with above?
A MUCH better and simple, less work way to approach this?
in place of stored procedure?
if possbile, create a view. and use that for the report.
Why?
Because you then get TWO VERY valuable bonus.
First, you can freely use the reports "where" clause, and it respects the where clause and STILL runs server side!!!
In other words, create a view for that existing query, but WITHOUT the date set in that view.
You then link to the view from access client side.
Now, to open (filter) the report, you can do this:
docmd.OpenReport "MyReport",acViewPreview,,"LS.ASOF_DTE='19-SEP-22'"
Now, of couse the above "where" clause can be a varible (string).
NOTE SUPER but SUPER careful here:
If you base the reprot on a pass-though query (that then uses the stored procedure), then the filter occures CLIENT SIDE!!!! (all rows will be returned and THEN filtered if you report is based on that stored procedure.
But, if you use a view?
The the filter makes it to the server side!!!!
While both the pass-through query or the "view" can be filtered with the above "open report" and the where clause we have above?
The view will still filter server side - the pass-though query will NOT!!!
Now, the 3rd way, is of course to build the stored procedure to accept a date parmater.
You then could do this:
with Currentdb.QueryDefs("MyPassThoughQueryGoesHere")
.SQL = "EXEC MyStoreProc " + "19-SEP-22"
END WITH
docmd.OpenReport "MyReport",acViewPreview
So, you CAN add and have a PT query and add a paramter as per above.
However, unless that stored procedure has some speical code, you are MUCH better off to create a view server side, base the reprot on that view, and simple pass + use the traditional "where" clause of the open report command. Even if that view has no filter, returns all rows in the table?
With the "where" clause of the open report command, ONLY those rows meeting that critera will be pulled down the network pipe.
So, say a invoice table with 1 million rows.
Create a view, link the view in access.
base report on that view.
Now, do this:
docmd.OpenReport "rptInvoice",,,"InvoiceNum = 134343"
The above will ONLY PULL down 1 row from the server. Even if the view has no filter and would return 1 million rows.
So, using a view is less work then creating the stored procedure.
But, you can modify the stored procedure to accept a paramter, and then as noted use the above example to modify the PT query you have, and THEN open the report.
I think overall, it is less work to use view. Furthermore, if you have a slow running report now?
Replace the query (move it) to sql server side. Get it working. Now link to that view (give it same name as what the client side query was in Access).
Now, EVEN if you had some fancy filter code in VBA, and used openReport with the "where" clause? It will now work, only pull the records down the network pipe, you get stored procedure performance without the hassles. and the date format and "where" clause for open report is access/VBA style - not sql server style SQL.
So, high recommend you try and dump the stored procedure and use a view (and EVEN better is any where clause works - not just one based on pre-defined parameters for the stored procedure - so you not limited to parameters)
. However, no big deal - the above "EXEC dbo.MyStoreProce " & strDate example would also work fine if you have a date parameter you wish to supply to the pass-though query.
I am currently working on a project of replacing our old access database queries, but on one of them I am not able to view the actual SQL View.
Does anyone know a way to force the view or to export it somehow?
Error causing problem:
The SQL statement could not be executed because it contains ambiguous outer joins.
Note that I can view the Design View without issue but when I right click on the tab and select SQL View is when I get the error.
I did attempt what #LeeMac mentioned below but same error occurs:
EDIT:
This question is not like Ambiguous Outer Joins?
The OP on that question can actually see and edit their SQL.
My issues is that I cannot see or edit the SQL as the SQL View wont open.
Try executing the following VBA code from the Immediate Window (accessible using Ctrl+G) in the VBA IDE (open the IDE using Alt+F11):
?CurrentDb.QueryDefs("YourQuery").SQL
Replace YourQuery with the name of your query.
This should print the SQL code which comprises your query - you can then analyse the SQL to determine the cause of the error.
It's odd this error would arise when merely viewing the SQL content of the query definition.
It makes me think that the query is perhaps referencing a crosstab subquery which is actually the cause of the error, but which needs to be evaluated in order for MS Access to determine the columns available when viewing the design of the query in question.
Try this:
hit ctrl-g, and from immediate window type in this:
saveastext acQuery,"Name of query","c:\test\mysql.txt"
Access ordinarily doesn't allow you to save invalid queries, so it's strange you somehow got into this situation in the first place.
If you can copy the query, you can easily get to the SQL by changing the query to a passthrough query, either through the GUI or through VBA:
Dim q As DAO.QueryDef
Set q = CurrentDb.QueryDefs!Query1
q.Connect = "ODBC;"
Debug.Print q.SQL
Passthrough queries are not validated, so you can freely read and write anything you want as SQL in it.
Note that this is irreversible when done through VBA. You can only change it back to a normal query once you made the SQL valid again. If you do it through the GUI, you can just not save it, though.
I had this problem and the issue was that i had a subquery that calculated fields but did not actually have a table in it. for example it would calculate first and last day of last month which is 2 calculated fields, then it was the first query in a series of queries that were built off it and the last one wouldnt resolve sql as original poster indicated also gave the ambiguous join message as well as query needs input table (which was that first subquery). i put a table with 1 record in it but didnt use the record and it worked.... so it just a needs a table in it.
I am wondering if anyone can explain why I get different results for the same query string between using the ExecuteSQL function in FM versus querying the database through a database browser (I'm using DBVisualizer).
Specifically, if I run
SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT IMV_ItemID) FROM IMV
in DBVis, I get 2802. In FileMaker, if I evaluate the expression
ExecuteSQL ( "SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT IMV_ItemID) FROM IMV"; ""; "")
then I get 2898. This makes me distrust the ExecuteSQL function. Inside of FM, the IMV table is an ODBC shadow, connected to the central MSSQL database. In DBVis, the application connects via JDBC. However, I don't think that should make any difference.
Any ideas why I get a different count for each method?
Actually, it turns out that when FM executes the SQL, it factors in whitespace, whereas DBVisualizer (not sure about other database browser apps, but I would assume it's the same) do not. Also, since the TRIM() function isn't supported by MSSQL (from what I've seen, at least) it is necessary to make the query inside of the ExecuteSQL statement something like:
SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT(LTRIM(RTRIM(IMV_ItemID)))) FROM IMV
Weird, but it works!
FM keeps a cache of the shadow table's records (for internal field-id-mapping). I'm not sure if the ExecuteSQL() function causes a re-creation of the cache. In other words: maybe the ESS shadow table is out of sync. Try to delete the cache by closing and restarting the FM client or perform a native find first.
You can also try a re-connect to the database server via the Open File script step.
HTH
I have used mysql for some projects and recently I moved to postgresql. In mysql when I alter a table or a field the corresponding query will be displayed in the page. But such a feature was not found in postgresql(kindly excuse me if I'm wrong). Since the query was readily available it was very helpful for me to test something in the local database(without explicitly typing the query), copy the printed query and run it in the server. Now it seems like I've to manually do all the trick. Even though I'm familiar with the query operations,at times it can be pretty time consuming process. Can anybody help me? How can I get the corresponding query to get displayed in postgresql(like in mysql) whenever a change is made to the table?
If you use SELECT * FROM ... there should not be any reason for your output to not include newly added columns, no matter how you get your results - would that be psql in command line, PgAdmin3 or any other IDE.
After you add new columns, it is possible that these changes are still in open transaction in other window or SQL command - be sure to COMMIT such transaction. Note that your changes to data or schema will not be visible to any other database clients until transaction commits.
If your IDE still does not show changes, maybe you need to refresh list of tables or if that option is not available, restart your IDE. If that does not work still, maybe you should use better IDE.
If you have used SELECT field1, field2, ... FROM ... then you must add new fields into your SELECT statement(s) - but this would be true for any other SQL implementation, MySQL included.
You could use the LISTEN / NOTIFY mechanism in PostgreSQL to notify your client on altering the database schema.
Typically, it is possible to know how many lines a query returns by using COUNT(*).
In the same manner, is there any way know how many megabytes for example the output of a given query is ?
Something like
SELECT MEMORYUSE(*) FROM bla bla bla
EDIT : I like the *exec sp_spaceused ... * approach, as it can be scripted!
For completeness, there are a couple of options to give you more information about the executing / executed query that you can view / set using SSMS as well. As shown below, the rowcount for the query is shown in the bottom right of SSMS by default. Also, I've highlighted the advanced query options, which you can set globally as shown here. Of course, you can also turn any of these options on for the particular statement or batch by including them in the query, i.e. 'set showplan_test on', etc..
Also you can turn on 'show client statistics' in SSMS as shown below (with sample output).
If you're using SQL Server, turn on Client Statistics and you 'll find "Bytes sent from client" and "Bytes received from server"
Here is related question
SQL Finding the size of query result
I think this will be useful:
SQL Server Query Size of Results Set
I don't think there is anyway without creating a temp table for the results and checking the size.