The MS documentation about differences Between Compatibility Level 80 and Level 90 is telling on Compatibility Level 80, "Empty SET statement (with no SET option assignments) is allowed."
What is Empty SET statement (with no SET option assignments) ?
Please give me example to clarify this?
This seems to be very old behavior and the only thing I have found is from some German forum:
In SQL Server 2000, the list of deprecated features in SQL Server 2005
has compatibility level 80 with the entry "Empty SET statement (with
no SET option assignments) is allowed." and compatibility level 90
with "Empty SET clause." is not allowed. ".
But what is an Empty SET statement?
My first thought was a SET statement without any further assignment.
But actually this idea was too suspicious for me, because what brings
a SET statement without assignment?
Only after some research I found something. In fact, it is possible in
SQL Server 2000 to simply place a SET in an SP - without any
assignment.
There is also a somewhat strange syntax that is used - for whatever
reason:
DECLARE #CustomerId As nchar (5)
SET SELECT #CustomerId = 'ALFKI'
SELECT * FROM dbo.Customers WHERE CustomerId = #CustomerId
I do not even want to think about the sense and nonsense of the SET
SELECT statement. The fact is that SQL Server generates 2 statements
(SET and SELECT) out of it. And a SET statement without assignment is
no longer possible with SQL Server 2005.
As soon as nothing like this exists, you are save to change the compatibility level.
I am not sure whether there exists a general answer before I give more details.
For exmaple: I have a view named vw_View
I tried the following two queries to get the result:
Under master database select * From [test].[dbo].[vw_View]
Under test database select * From [dbo].[vw_View]
Could anyone tell me why query against the same query but from master database is much slower than query against from the other databases, I even tried the others by:
Use [db] --any other databases not master database
select * From [test].[dbo].[vw_View]
I have checked the actual execution plan, the join order differs but why it will change since I have already specify [test].[dbo].[vw_View] when under master
Just out of curiosity, thanks in advance.
Note this might not be the answer but it was too much text for a comment anyway...
One thing that we hear about a lot is when the developers complain about a slow running procedure which only runs slow when called from the application but runs fine when executing from the SSMS.
More often than not it is due to the different execution settings depending on from where the procedure is being called. To check if there is a difference in those setting I usually use SQL Profiler.
In your case you can open two different windows in the SSMS one in the context of Master database and the other in the context of the User Database and run SQL Profiler, the very first event profiler will capture, will be the Event Class = Existing Connections and Text Data = -- network protocol: LPC......
This record will show you all the default settings for each session where your are executing the commands, The settings would look something like....
-- network protocol: LPC
set quoted_identifier on
set arithabort off
set numeric_roundabort off
set ansi_warnings on
set ansi_padding on
set ansi_nulls on
set concat_null_yields_null on
set cursor_close_on_commit off
set implicit_transactions off
set language us_english
set dateformat mdy
set datefirst 7
set transaction isolation level read committed
Now compare the settings of both sessions and see what are the differences.
The profiler also has a column SIPD which will help you to identify which window is which. I am pretty sure the answer is around somewhere there.
Have the same issue - executing a view from master goes infinitely long, but executing the same view "under any other user database on this server" goes only 8 sec.
I have an environment where we just migrated to SQL Server 2017 and "all other databases" have Compatibility Level = 2008 (or 2012)
So I did a few tests:
If I create a new DB with default Compatibility Level = 2017 and run the query it executes infinitely long
If I change Compatibility Level to 2008 and reconnect - 8 sec
If I change Compatibility Level back to 2017 - long run again
And the final thing we have noticed about the query itself - the query is using CHARINDEX function and if I comment it out the query executes equally 8 sec for both compatibility levels.
So... it looks like we have an mixed issue with CHARINDEX function execution on legacy database under Compatibility Level = 2017 context.
The solution is (if you can call it this way...) - to execute legacy queries under (the same) legacy execution context.
I want to execute a stored procedure virtually and get the returned columns. I use fmtonly like below :
set fmtonly on
exec spName null
set fmtonly off
but using fmtonly caused to run all the lines of code and result of this work is ERROR.
Is there any solution for doing this work?
You need to use sp_describe_first_result_set which is new to SQL Server 2012. Note that this requires you to provide the input parameters (at least the types).
In T-SQL development one is expected to know what procedures is calling and what is the expected result set. Before SQL server 2012 there was very little support for dynamic, runtime, discovery of procedure output and required parameters. This new procedure, along with others like sp_describe_undeclared_parameters can be used to create tools that need to explore the available programming API surface. The very fact that these were added to 2012 should indicate that the equivalent cannot be properly handled pre-2012. Solutions like loopback linked servers have many problems, primarily because they actually execute the code with potential disastrous effects.
Is it possible to suppress warnings generated by T-SQL scripts? If so, how?
I know I can turn of the 'records affected' messages with
SET NOCOUNT ON
but is there an equivalent for warnings?
Eg:
Warning: Null value is eliminated by an aggregate or other SET operation.
If I'm expecting these errors, it helps to sift the real errors from the chaff in a big script.
Thanks.
See SET ANSI_WARNINGS {ON | OFF}
I am having a problem with an update stored procedure. The error is:
UPDATE failed because the following SET options have incorrect settings: 'QUOTED_IDENTIFIER'. Verify that SET options are correct for use with indexed views and/or indexes on computed columns and/or query notifications and/or xml data type methods.
SQL State: 42000
Native Error: 1934
Unfortunately, there are no indexed views, computed columns, or query notifications for this table. This Stored Procedure was running fine for past couple of days and since today has been returning this error.
Is there any suggestion that would help in identifying the problem?
Note: If I set the quoted_identifier to ON and rerun the CREATE PROCEDURE, the issue will be fixed (for now). But I want to understand what triggered this issue in the first place.
To avoid that error, I needed to add
SET ANSI_NULLS, QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON;
for all my stored procs editing a table with a computed column.
You don't need to add the SET inside the proc, just use it during creation, like this:
SET ANSI_NULLS, QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON;
GO
CREATE PROCEDURE dbo.proc_myproc
...
I got this error when I tried to run an sql file via the command line with sqlcmd:
sqlcmd -i myfile.sql
By default QUOTED_IDENTIFIER is set to OFF when using this command line tool and you will get the same error (no matter that in the SSMS it may be set to ON and the same script will pass).
So indeed the solution is to add this QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON to your sql file like Jim suggested, or explicitly specify the flag -I:
sqlcmd -i myfile.sql -I
We cannot create a indexed view by setting the quoted identifier off. I just tried it and SQL 2005 throws an error straight away if it is turned off:
Cannot create index. Object 'SmartListVW' was created with the following SET options off: 'QUOTED_IDENTIFIER'.
As gbn said, rebuilding the indexes must be the only other way it got turned off.
I have seen lots of articles saying it must be on before creating index on views. Otherwise you would get an error while inserting, updating the table, but here I can get the error straight away, so sql engine won't allow to create index on views by setting it to off, per this msdn link.
I have asked a similar question here in stack sometime ago...
EDIT
I turned off the global queryexecution (in editor) ANSI settings and ran the index script in new editor, this time also it throws the same error. So it's clear we can't create indexes on views by turning off quoted_identifier.
I'm late to this party but had this error and wanted to share it.
Our problem was recurrent but random so we knew it wasn't an object that had been created incorrectly.
We finally tracked it down to an ODBC connection on one of the servers in our Citrix farm. On that server, the ODBC in question had had its QUOTED_IDENTIFIERS turned off (unchecked). On all the other servers, it was checked as expected. We turned the option on and the problem was instantly solved.
I got this error when I run SQL Agent Job, which has 3 steps T-sql scripts.
Msg 1934, Sev 16, State 1, Line 15 : UPDATE failed because the
following SET options have incorrect settings: 'QUOTED_IDENTIFIER'.
Verify that SET options are correct for use with indexed views and/or
indexes on computed columns and/or filtered indexes and/or query
notifications and/or XML data type methods and/or spatial index
operations. [SQLSTATE 42000]
I added
SET ANSI_NULLS, QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON; to the top of the Agent Job and that solved the issue.
Some thoughts:
Did indexes get rebuilt? If you do index maintenance using DMO, then quoted_identifier will not always be preserved. It can be a pain to track down and was a particular problem is SQL Server 2000 until SP4 or so.
However, I've seen on SQL Server 2005 some time ago too.
SELECT
OBJECT_NAME (sm.object_id) AS [Name],
sm.uses_ansi_nulls,
sm.uses_quoted_identifier,
N'SET ANSI_NULLS, QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON;
--change the below CREATE to an ALTER.
GO
' + sm.definition AS PossibleFixingStatement
FROM
sys.sql_modules AS sm
WHERE
1 = 1
AND
(
sm.uses_ansi_nulls <> 1
OR sm.uses_quoted_identifier <> 1
)
AND NOT EXISTS
(
SELECT
*
FROM
sys.objects AS o
WHERE
o.is_ms_shipped = 1
AND o.object_id = sm.[object_id]
)
ORDER BY
sm.uses_ansi_nulls,
sm.uses_quoted_identifier;
Query to identify the affected objects. Part of the sp_blitz procedure mentioned here at https://github.com/BrentOzarULTD/SQL-Server-First-Responder-Kit/issues/1698
I got this error today running a stored procedure in SSMS. Disconnecting from the server and reconnecting with a new session solved the problem for me. The SP I was running had never had this problem before.
I got the same error running this query in the Job Scheduler SQL Server Agent
UPDATE [Order]
SET OrderStatusID = 100
WHERE OrderStatusID = 200
AND OrderID IN (
[...]
)
I solved removing the [ ] characters from [Order]:
UPDATE Order
SET OrderStatusID = 100
WHERE OrderStatusID = 200
AND OrderID IN (
[...]
)
No more errors
I got the same error, had to add a couple of settings to get it resolved:
SET ANSI_NULLS ON;
SET ANSI_PADDING ON;
SET ANSI_WARNINGS ON;
SET ARITHABORT ON;
SET CONCAT_NULL_YIELDS_NULL ON;
SET NUMERIC_ROUNDABORT OFF;
SET QUOTED_IDENTIFIER OFF;
SET NOCOUNT ON;