I have a stored procedure that uses several parameters to build a dynamic query, which I execute. The query works fine, however, this procedure will be the data source for a Crystal Report which needs a "static" SELECT with field names it can reference. The Crystal Report is called from a Visual Basic application, and gets it's parameters passed to it from the application. It, in turn, passes the parameters to the SQL Server stored procedure.
Somehow I need to
SELECT fieldname1, fieldname2
FROM Exec(#MydynamcSQL)
after I build #MydynamcSQL. It is a complicated application accessing specific tables based on year, and specific databases based on the user. I am pretty new to SQL, so maybe there are other methods I could use that I am unaware of?
Try creating a temporary table to insert the data temporarily, then select from that table:
DECLARE #MydynamcSQL varchar(1000);
SET #MydynamcSQL = 'select fieldname1, fieldname1 from table1';
CREATE TABLE #Result
(
fieldname1 varchar(1000),
fieldname2 varchar(1000)
)
INSERT #Result Exec(#MydynamcSQL)
SELECT fieldname1, fieldname1 -- here you have "static SELECT with field names"
FROM #Result
DROP TABLE #Result
Did you try making the who thing dynamic, such as:
Exec( 'SELECT fieldname1, fieldname2 FROM ' + #MydynamcSQL)
It's worth noting although out of scope, ensure you are not vulnarable to sql injection attacks. A parameterized dynamic query potentially leaves you exposed.
Related
Is there a way to create a dynamic temp table. Below sql code is declaring a variable #tic. I am planning to insert contents from table1 to temp table #df. So instead of giving directly as #df, I am passing as a variable. But below is code is not successful. Can anyone help me here?
declare #tic as varchar(100) = 'df'
select *
into '#' + #tic from (
select * from [dbo].[table1])
select * from #df
Is there a way? Well, I think of the answer as "yes and no and maybe".
As far as I know, there is no way to do this using a local temporary table. As Stu explains in the comment, you would need dynamic SQL to define the table name and then the table would not be visible in the outer scope, because it is a local temporary table.
The "yes" is because one type of temporary table are global temporary tables. These are tables that persist across different scopes. And they are defined using ## instead of # as the prefix. So this works:
declare #tic as varchar(100) = 'df'
declare #sql nvarchar(max);
set #sql = 'select * into ##' + #tic + ' from table1';
select #sql;
exec sp_executesql #sql;
select * from ##df;
(Here is a db<>fiddle.)
The "maybe" is because I'm quite skeptical that you really need this. Dynamic table names are rarely useful in SQL systems, precisely because they depend on dynamic SQL. Introducing dynamic names into SQL (whether columns or tables) is dangerous, both because of the danger of SQL injection and also because it can introduce hard-to-debug syntax errors.
If you are trying to solve a real problem, there might be alternative approaches that are better suited to SQL Server.
It looks like #temptables created using dynamic SQL via the EXECUTE string method have a different scope and can't be referenced by "fixed" SQLs in the same stored procedure.
However, I can reference a temp table created by a dynamic SQL statement in a subsequence dynamic SQL but it seems that a stored procedure does not return a query result to a calling client unless the SQL is fixed.
A simple 2 table scenario:
I have 2 tables. Let's call them Orders and Items. Order has a Primary key of OrderId and Items has a Primary Key of ItemId. Items.OrderId is the foreign key to identify the parent Order. An Order can have 1 to n Items.
I want to be able to provide a very flexible "query builder" type interface to the user to allow the user to select what Items he want to see. The filter criteria can be based on fields from the Items table and/or from the parent Order table. If an Item meets the filter condition including and condition on the parent Order if one exists, the Item should be return in the query as well as the parent Order.
Usually, I suppose, most people would construct a join between the Item table and the parent Order tables. I would like to perform 2 separate queries instead. One to return all of the qualifying Items and the other to return all of the distinct parent Orders. The reason is two fold and you may or may not agree.
The first reason is that I need to query all of the columns in the parent Order table and if I did a single query to join the Orders table to the Items table, I would be repoeating the Order information multiple times. Since there are typically a large number of items per Order, I'd like to avoid this because it would result in much more data being transfered to a fat client. Instead, as mentioned, I would like to return the two tables individually in a dataset and use the two tables within to populate a custom Order and child Items client objects. (I don't know enough about LINQ or Entity Framework yet. I build my objects by hand). The second reason I would like to return two tables instead of one is because I already have another procedure that returns all of the Items for a given OrderId along with the parent Order and I would like to use the same 2-table approach so that I could reuse the client code to populate my custom Order and Client objects from the 2 datatables returned.
What I was hoping to do was this:
Construct a dynamic SQL string on the Client which joins the orders table to the Items table and filters appropriate on each table as specified by the custom filter created on the Winform fat-client app. The SQL build on the client would have looked something like this:
TempSQL = "
INSERT INTO #ItemsToQuery
OrderId, ItemsId
FROM
Orders, Items
WHERE
Orders.OrderID = Items.OrderId AND
/* Some unpredictable Order filters go here */
AND
/* Some unpredictable Items filters go here */
"
Then, I would call a stored procedure,
CREATE PROCEDURE GetItemsAndOrders(#tempSql as text)
Execute (#tempSQL) --to create the #ItemsToQuery table
SELECT * FROM Items WHERE Items.ItemId IN (SELECT ItemId FROM #ItemsToQuery)
SELECT * FROM Orders WHERE Orders.OrderId IN (SELECT DISTINCT OrderId FROM #ItemsToQuery)
The problem with this approach is that #ItemsToQuery table, since it was created by dynamic SQL, is inaccessible from the following 2 static SQLs and if I change the static SQLs to dynamic, no results are passed back to the fat client.
3 around come to mind but I'm look for a better one:
1) The first SQL could be performed by executing the dynamically constructed SQL from the client. The results could then be passed as a table to a modified version of the above stored procedure. I am familiar with passing table data as XML. If I did this, the stored proc could then insert the data into a temporary table using a static SQL that, because it was created by dynamic SQL, could then be queried without issue. (I could also investigate into passing the new Table type param instead of XML.) However, I would like to avoid passing up potentially large lists to a stored procedure.
2) I could perform all the queries from the client.
The first would be something like this:
SELECT Items.* FROM Orders, Items WHERE Order.OrderId = Items.OrderId AND (dynamic filter)
SELECT Orders.* FROM Orders, Items WHERE Order.OrderId = Items.OrderId AND (dynamic filter)
This still provides me with the ability to reuse my client sided object-population code because the Orders and Items continue to be returned in two different tables.
I have a feeling to, that I might have some options using a Table data type within my stored proc, but that is also new to me and I would appreciate a little bit of spoon feeding on that one.
If you even scanned this far in what I wrote, I am surprised, but if so, I woul dappreciate any of your thoughts on how to accomplish this best.
You first need to create your table first then it will be available in the dynamic SQL.
This works:
CREATE TABLE #temp3 (id INT)
EXEC ('insert #temp3 values(1)')
SELECT *
FROM #temp3
This will not work:
EXEC (
'create table #temp2 (id int)
insert #temp2 values(1)'
)
SELECT *
FROM #temp2
In other words:
Create temp table
Execute proc
Select from temp table
Here is complete example:
CREATE PROC prTest2 #var VARCHAR(100)
AS
EXEC (#var)
GO
CREATE TABLE #temp (id INT)
EXEC prTest2 'insert #temp values(1)'
SELECT *
FROM #temp
1st Method - Enclose multiple statements in the same Dynamic SQL Call:
DECLARE #DynamicQuery NVARCHAR(MAX)
SET #DynamicQuery = 'Select * into #temp from (select * from tablename) alias
select * from #temp
drop table #temp'
EXEC sp_executesql #DynamicQuery
2nd Method - Use Global Temp Table:
(Careful, you need to take extra care of global variable.)
IF OBJECT_ID('tempdb..##temp2') IS NULL
BEGIN
EXEC (
'create table ##temp2 (id int)
insert ##temp2 values(1)'
)
SELECT *
FROM ##temp2
END
Don't forget to delete ##temp2 object manually once your done with it:
IF (OBJECT_ID('tempdb..##temp2') IS NOT NULL)
BEGIN
DROP Table ##temp2
END
Note: Don't use this method 2 if you don't know the full structure on database.
I had the same issue that #Muflix mentioned. When you don't know the columns being returned, or they are being generated dynamically, what I've done is create a global table with a unique id, then delete it when I'm done with it, this looks something like what's shown below:
DECLARE #DynamicSQL NVARCHAR(MAX)
DECLARE #DynamicTable VARCHAR(255) = 'DynamicTempTable_' + CONVERT(VARCHAR(36), NEWID())
DECLARE #DynamicColumns NVARCHAR(MAX)
--Get "#DynamicColumns", example: SET #DynamicColumns = '[Column1], [Column2]'
SET #DynamicSQL = 'SELECT ' + #DynamicColumns + ' INTO [##' + #DynamicTable + ']' +
' FROM [dbo].[TableXYZ]'
EXEC sp_executesql #DynamicSQL
SET #DynamicSQL = 'IF OBJECT_ID(''tempdb..##' + #DynamicTable + ''' , ''U'') IS NOT NULL ' +
' BEGIN DROP TABLE [##' + #DynamicTable + '] END'
EXEC sp_executesql #DynamicSQL
Certainly not the best solution, but this seems to work for me.
I would strongly suggest you have a read through http://www.sommarskog.se/arrays-in-sql-2005.html
Personally I like the approach of passing a comma delimited text list, then parsing it with text to table function and joining to it. The temp table approach can work if you create it first in the connection. But it feel a bit messier.
Result sets from dynamic SQL are returned to the client. I have done this quite a lot.
You're right about issues with sharing data through temp tables and variables and things like that between the SQL and the dynamic SQL it generates.
I think in trying to get your temp table working, you have probably got some things confused, because you can definitely get data from a SP which executes dynamic SQL:
USE SandBox
GO
CREATE PROCEDURE usp_DynTest(#table_type AS VARCHAR(255))
AS
BEGIN
DECLARE #sql AS VARCHAR(MAX) = 'SELECT * FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TABLES WHERE TABLE_TYPE = ''' + #table_type + ''''
EXEC (#sql)
END
GO
EXEC usp_DynTest 'BASE TABLE'
GO
EXEC usp_DynTest 'VIEW'
GO
DROP PROCEDURE usp_DynTest
GO
Also:
USE SandBox
GO
CREATE PROCEDURE usp_DynTest(#table_type AS VARCHAR(255))
AS
BEGIN
DECLARE #sql AS VARCHAR(MAX) = 'SELECT * INTO #temp FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TABLES WHERE TABLE_TYPE = ''' + #table_type + '''; SELECT * FROM #temp;'
EXEC (#sql)
END
GO
EXEC usp_DynTest 'BASE TABLE'
GO
EXEC usp_DynTest 'VIEW'
GO
DROP PROCEDURE usp_DynTest
GO
I'm using SQL Server 2008.
How can I pass Table Valued parameter to a Stored procedure across different Databases, but same server?
Should I create the same table type in both databases?
Please, give an example or a link according to the problem.
Thanks for any kind of help.
In response to this comment (if I'm correct and that using TVPs between databases isn't possible):
What choice do I have in this situation? Using XML type?
The purist approach would be to say that if both databases are working with the same data, they ought to be merged into a single database. The pragmatist realizes that this isn't always possible - but since you can obviously change both the caller and callee, maybe just use a temp table that both stored procs know about.
I don't believe it's possible - you can't reference a table type from another database, and even with identical type definitions in both DBs, a value of one type isn't assignable to the other.
You don't pass the temp table between databases. A temp table is always stored in tempdb, and is accessible to your connection, so long as the connection is open and the temp table isn't dropped.
So, you create the temp table in the caller:
CREATE TABLE #Values (ID int not null,ColA varchar(10) not null)
INSERT INTO #Values (ID,ColA)
/* Whatever you do to populate the table */
EXEC OtherDB..OtherProc
And then in the callee:
CREATE PROCEDURE OtherProc
/* No parameter passed */
AS
SELECT * from #Values
Table UDTs are only valid for stored procs within the same database.
So yes you would have to create the type on each server and reference it in the stored procs - e.g. just run the first part of this example in both DBs http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb510489.aspx.
If you don't need the efficency you can always use other methods - i.e. pass an xml document parameter or have the s.p. expect a temp table with the input data.
Edit: added example
create database Test1
create database Test2
go
use Test1
create type PersonalMessage as TABLE
(Message varchar(50))
go
create proc InsertPersonalMessage #Message PersonalMessage READONLY AS
select * from #Message
go
use Test2
create type PersonalMessage as TABLE
(Message varchar(50))
go
create proc InsertPersonalMessage #Message PersonalMessage READONLY AS
select * from #Message
go
use Test1
declare #mymsg PersonalMessage
insert #mymsg select 'oh noes'
exec InsertPersonalMessage #mymsg
go
use Test2
declare #mymsg2 PersonalMessage
insert #mymsg2 select 'oh noes'
exec InsertPersonalMessage #mymsg2
Disadvantage is that there are two copies of the data.
But you would be able to run the batch against each database simultaneously.
Whether this is any better than using a table table is really down to what processing/data sizes you have - btw to use a temp table from an s.p. you just access it from the s.p. code (and it fails if it doesn't exist).
Another way to solve this (though not necessarily the correct way) is to only utilize the UDT as a part of a dynamic SQL call.
USE [db1]
CREATE PROCEDURE [dbo].[sp_Db2Data_Sync]
AS
BEGIN
/*
*
* Presumably, you have some other logic here that requires this sproc to live in db1.
* Maybe it's how you get your identifier?
*
*/
DECLARE #SQL VARCHAR(MAX) = '
USE [db2]
DECLARE #db2tvp tableType
INSERT INTO #db2tvp
SELECT dataColumn1
FROM db2.dbo.tblData td
WHERE td.Id = ' + CAST(#YourIdentifierHere AS VARCHAR) '
EXEC db2.dbo.sp_BulkData_Sync #db2tvp
'
EXEC(#SQL)
END
It's definitely not a purist approach, and it doesn't work for every use case, but it is technically an option.
I would like to create a SP or UDF where I supply a table and column name as a parameter and it does something to that target. I'm using Sql Server 2005
Trivial Example of what I'm trying to accomplish:
CREATE FUNCTION Example (#TableName AS VARCHAR(100))
RETURNS TABLE
AS
BEGIN
SELECT *
INTO #temp
FROM #TableName
RETURN #temp
END
The example is just something trivial to illustrate what I'm trying to accomplish in terms of passing the Table name as a parameter.
Is this possible to do w/o concatinating strings and calling the EXEC function?
Ultimately, I'm trying to convert the answer from this question into something reusable.
This reeks of SQL injection. You would still need to use EXEC to do this.
No. Can't do it. Sadly, there is no macro pre-complier in T-SQL. The closest you'll get is SQLCMD mode, but that's only for scripts, can't use it in object definitions.
Are you doing the same thing to the table each time?
You could dynamically redefine a synonym, but that still requires an EXEC and you lose concurrency. You could serialize execution with a queue, but at that point you may be better off w/ plain old dynamic SQL.
You might try temporary tables, not passed in as a variable, but created in the parent connection or calling procedure. eg.
create proc #proc as
select * from #table
go
create table #table (col1 int)
insert #table values (1)
insert #table values (2)
insert #table values (3)
go
exec #proc
go
For more ways to share data between stored procedures, see here: http://www.sommarskog.se/share_data.html
I have a SQL Insert query inside a stored proc, for inserting rows into a linked server table.
Since the stored proc is getting called within a parent transaction, this Insert statement tries to use a DTC for inserting rows into the linked server.
I would like to avoid DTC from getting involved.
Is there any way I can do that (like a hint) for the Insert SQL statement to ignore transactional scope?
My suggestion is that you store whatever you want to insert into a staging table, and once the procedure is over run the cross server insert. To my knowledge there is no way of ignoring the transaction you are in once you are within the SProc execution.
In contrast, if you use .NET 2.0's System.Transaction namespace, you can tell specific statements not to participate in any parent scope transaction. This would require you to write some of your logic in code rather than stored procedures, but would work.
Here's a relevant link.
Good luck,
Alan.
Try using openquery to call the linked server query/sp instead of direct calling
That worked for me
so instead of
insert into ...
select * from mylinkedserver.pubs.dbo.authors
e.g.
DECLARE #TSQL varchar(8000), #VAR char(2)
SELECT #VAR = 'CA'
SELECT #TSQL = 'SELECT * FROM OPENQUERY(MyLinkedServer,''SELECT * FROM pubs.dbo.authors WHERE state = ''''' + #VAR + ''''''')'
INSERT INTO .....
EXEC (#TSQL)