I did a succesful migration from MySql to Sql Server using the migration tool.
Unfortunately for some reason it labels the tables database.DBO.tablename instead of just database.tablename
I have never used Sql Server so perhaps this is just the way they name their tables.
When I do:
SELECT TOP 1000 [rid]
,[filename]
,[qcname]
,[compound]
,[response]
,[isid]
,[isidresp]
,[finalconc]
,[rowid]
FROM [test].[calibration]
it does not work
But, when I do:
SELECT TOP 1000 [rid]
,[filename]
,[qcname]
,[compound]
,[response]
,[isid]
,[isidresp]
,[finalconc]
,[rowid]
FROM [test].[dbo].[calibration]
it works.
Does anyone know why it prefixes with DBO?
dbo is the standard database owner for anything you create (tables, stored procedures, etc,..), hence the migration tool automatically prefixing everything with it.
When you access something in Sql Server, such as a table called calibration, the following are functionally equivalent:
calibration
dbo.calibration
database_name.dbo.calibration
server_name.database_name.dbo.calibration
MySql doesn't, as far as I remember (we migrated a solution from MySql to SqlServer about 12 months ago using custom scripts executed by nant) support database owner's when referencing objects, hence you're probably not familiar with four part (server_name.database_name.owner_name.object_name) references.
Basically, if you want to specify the database you're accessing, you also need to specify the "owner" of the object. i.e, the following are functionally identical:
USE [master]
GO
SELECT * FROM [mydatabase].[dbo].[calibration]
USE [mydatabase]
GO
SELECT * FROM [calibration]
SqlServer uses an owner name when it references tables. In this case, dbo is the owner.
MySQL doesn't use owner for table names, which is why you didn't see those names before.
SQL Server has something called schemas, in this case the default schema is dbo but it could be anything you wanted. Schemas are used to logically group objects. So you can create a Employee schema and have all the Employee tables, views, procs and functions in there, this then also enables you to give certain users only access to certain schemas
Tell me your migration tool you have used, and let me know the version of from and to databases.
Regards
Eugene
You do have an issue here with the default schema, if it's set to 'dbo' for the user you logged in as you don't need to specify it. See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms176060.aspx
Related
I'm going to guess that the answer is "no" based on the below error message (and this Google result), but is there anyway to perform a cross-database query using PostgreSQL?
databaseA=# select * from databaseB.public.someTableName;
ERROR: cross-database references are not implemented:
"databaseB.public.someTableName"
I'm working with some data that is partitioned across two databases although data is really shared between the two (userid columns in one database come from the users table in the other database). I have no idea why these are two separate databases instead of schema, but c'est la vie...
Note: As the original asker implied, if you are setting up two databases on the same machine you probably want to make two schemas instead - in that case you don't need anything special to query across them.
postgres_fdw
Use postgres_fdw (foreign data wrapper) to connect to tables in any Postgres database - local or remote.
Note that there are foreign data wrappers for other popular data sources. At this time, only postgres_fdw and file_fdw are part of the official Postgres distribution.
For Postgres versions before 9.3
Versions this old are no longer supported, but if you need to do this in a pre-2013 Postgres installation, there is a function called dblink.
I've never used it, but it is maintained and distributed with the rest of PostgreSQL. If you're using the version of PostgreSQL that came with your Linux distro, you might need to install a package called postgresql-contrib.
dblink() -- executes a query in a remote database
dblink executes a query (usually a SELECT, but it can be any SQL
statement that returns rows) in a remote database.
When two text arguments are given, the first one is first looked up as
a persistent connection's name; if found, the command is executed on
that connection. If not found, the first argument is treated as a
connection info string as for dblink_connect, and the indicated
connection is made just for the duration of this command.
one of the good example:
SELECT *
FROM table1 tb1
LEFT JOIN (
SELECT *
FROM dblink('dbname=db2','SELECT id, code FROM table2')
AS tb2(id int, code text);
) AS tb2 ON tb2.column = tb1.column;
Note: I am giving this information for future reference. Reference
I have run into this before an came to the same conclusion about cross database queries as you. What I ended up doing was using schemas to divide the table space that way I could keep the tables grouped but still query them all.
Just to add a bit more information.
There is no way to query a database other than the current one. Because PostgreSQL loads database-specific system catalogs, it is uncertain how a cross-database query should even behave.
contrib/dblink allows cross-database queries using function calls. Of course, a client can also make simultaneous connections to different databases and merge the results on the client side.
PostgreSQL FAQ
Yes, you can by using DBlink (postgresql only) and DBI-Link (allows foreign cross database queriers) and TDS_LInk which allows queries to be run against MS SQL server.
I have used DB-Link and TDS-link before with great success.
I have checked and tried to create a foreign key relationships between 2 tables in 2 different databases using both dblink and postgres_fdw but with no result.
Having read the other peoples feedback on this, for example here and here and in some other sources it looks like there is no way to do that currently:
The dblink and postgres_fdw indeed enable one to connect to and query tables in other databases, which is not possible with the standard Postgres, but they do not allow to establish foreign key relationships between tables in different databases.
If performance is important and most queries are read-only, I would suggest to replicate data over to another database. While this seems like unneeded duplication of data, it might help if indexes are required.
This can be done with simple on insert triggers which in turn call dblink to update another copy. There are also full-blown replication options (like Slony) but that's off-topic.
see https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com/en/joining-data-from-multiple-postgres-databases/ [published 2017]
These days you also have the option to use https://prestodb.io/
You can run SQL on that PrestoDB node and it will distribute the SQL query as required. It can connect to the same node twice for different databases, or it might be connecting to different nodes on different hosts.
It does not support:
DELETE
ALTER TABLE
CREATE TABLE (CREATE TABLE AS is supported)
GRANT
REVOKE
SHOW GRANTS
SHOW ROLES
SHOW ROLE GRANTS
So you should only use it for SELECT and JOIN needs. Connect directly to each database for the above needs. (It looks like you can also INSERT or UPDATE which is nice)
Client applications connect to PrestoDB primarily using JDBC, but other types of connection are possible including a Tableu compatible web API
This is an open source tool governed by the Linux Foundation and Presto Foundation.
The founding members of the Presto Foundation are: Facebook, Uber,
Twitter, and Alibaba.
The current members are: Facebook, Uber, Twitter, Alibaba, Alluxio,
Ahana, Upsolver, and Intel.
In case someone needs a more involved example on how to do cross-database queries, here's an example that cleans up the databasechangeloglock table on every database that has it:
CREATE EXTENSION IF NOT EXISTS dblink;
DO
$$
DECLARE database_name TEXT;
DECLARE conn_template TEXT;
DECLARE conn_string TEXT;
DECLARE table_exists Boolean;
BEGIN
conn_template = 'user=myuser password=mypass dbname=';
FOR database_name IN
SELECT datname FROM pg_database
WHERE datistemplate = false
LOOP
conn_string = conn_template || database_name;
table_exists = (select table_exists_ from dblink(conn_string, '(select Count(*) > 0 from information_schema.tables where table_name = ''databasechangeloglock'')') as (table_exists_ Boolean));
IF table_exists THEN
perform dblink_exec(conn_string, 'delete from databasechangeloglock');
END IF;
END LOOP;
END
$$
I struggled for a while with a bug, and then found out the reason for it in a database stored procedure code, which contained the old name of a database in a table name, whereas the current database name was already different. So, I'd like to ask:
Is there a situation in which using a database name as a part of a full table name (database name + schema name + table name) can be justified (provided we don't touch tables in other databases) or is it always a bad practice? How to correctly use a database name in sql scripts to keep code neutral to a specific database?
Code just for an illustration:
CREATE PROCEDURE [dbo].[MyProc]
AS
BEGIN
DELETE FROM [MyDatabase].[dbo].[MyTable]
END
No, you shouldn't use database names in a stored procedure unless you need to address two databases.
It causes exactly the kinds of bugs you're seeing. When the database name changes, all your SP code breaks, or continues working, but on the old database.
It does make sense if you are sending a SQL query to the database, but only if the application dynamically picks the database name to insert into the query.
My suggestion is that you do a full export of your database schema, and search for database names that are hardcoded and remove them.
It really depends on how your scripts are implemented.
Even if you don't refer to a table as
[MyDatabase].[dbo].[MyTable]
you will still need to refer to the database by:
USE [MyDatabase]
earlier in the script.
It is possible to mix trusted database tables in a single query. When someone do this,it is justified and mandatory to include database on table 'path'.
I don't found a reason out of this scenario if stored procedure and table is on the same database.
You can search all database name occurencies through database catalog in order to fix your development. For SQL Server 2005:
SELECT Name
FROM sys.procedures
WHERE OBJECT_DEFINITION(OBJECT_ID) LIKE '%databasename%'
GO
For SQL Server 2000:
SELECT DISTINCT so.name
FROM syscomments sc
INNER JOIN sysobjects so ON sc.id=so.id
WHERE sc.TEXT LIKE '%databasename%'
GO
I've been told that RDBMS ( SQL Server in this case ) make use of the temporary database to perform its internal job, for instance when a SELECT count( column ) FROM foo query is performed.
What kind of queries / statements trigger the use of the temporary database?
background:
We are currently about to change the collation on our application database, but we have been told there might be problems if that database make use of the temporary database, because they will have different collation. The rationale is the temporary database is already being used by other applications.
So we want to identify what kind of queries may trigger temp db usage and see if they'll have any problem.
I've found this about when is the db used:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190768.aspx
I'm pretty sure there is no way, but i'm putting this out there for those expert beyond my knowledge.
What i am looking to do is to somehow alter SELECT statements before they are executed, at the database level. For a seriously pared-down example, i'd like to do something like the following... when someone executes the following SQL
SELECT * FROM users.MESSAGES
i'd like to catch it, before it executes, and alter the statement to something like
SELECT * FROM users.MESSAGES WHERE RECIPIENT = ORIGINAL_LOGIN()
allowing me to enforce user limitations on the data in a fashion similar to ORACLE's VPDs, without needing to resort to creating views on top of all my tables that might need this.
Look into using a VIEW.
Sadly, this is not possible.
Even the Microsoft SQL Server row-level security features (e.g. in the security catalogs) are implemented using views.
So, if you really need the feature, you're going to have to set up views with SUSER_NAME() or some similar individual- or role-identifier in the WHERE clauses.
Sorry!
Use views (or inline table-valued functions), generate the views automatically and remove rights from the tables.
There used to be a round-about unethical way in SQL 2000. You could create a trigger on master..sysprocesses table for INSERT and do this kind of manipulation. Thankfully, this is not possible, at least AFAIK, in SQL 2005, as master..sysprocesses is a fake table.
For the benefit of some of US still using SQL 2000, here is how to do this in SQL 2000:
In the console right click on
servername
In the properties go to server
settings tab
Then check allow modifications to be
made directly to the system catalogs
checkbox.
Selected the sysprocesses table in
sysobjects and change it's xtype
from S(system) to U(user)
Now go to Master DB, tables - right
click on sysprocesses-All
tasks-Manage Triggers
Then you can write your trigger
After you are done, turn back
everything to it's original state.
Even with all of this, I still doubt if you can change the Select statement.
Raj
Disclaimer: Try this at your own risk. Be warned that you are making changes to system objects which could lead to undesirable results.
First, grant no direct table access to the users so they can't see the data from an ad hoc query. Make them use a stored proc to access the table and one of the parameters of the proc is the user login. Then write the code so that it only selects records for that login.
I'm going to guess that the answer is "no" based on the below error message (and this Google result), but is there anyway to perform a cross-database query using PostgreSQL?
databaseA=# select * from databaseB.public.someTableName;
ERROR: cross-database references are not implemented:
"databaseB.public.someTableName"
I'm working with some data that is partitioned across two databases although data is really shared between the two (userid columns in one database come from the users table in the other database). I have no idea why these are two separate databases instead of schema, but c'est la vie...
Note: As the original asker implied, if you are setting up two databases on the same machine you probably want to make two schemas instead - in that case you don't need anything special to query across them.
postgres_fdw
Use postgres_fdw (foreign data wrapper) to connect to tables in any Postgres database - local or remote.
Note that there are foreign data wrappers for other popular data sources. At this time, only postgres_fdw and file_fdw are part of the official Postgres distribution.
For Postgres versions before 9.3
Versions this old are no longer supported, but if you need to do this in a pre-2013 Postgres installation, there is a function called dblink.
I've never used it, but it is maintained and distributed with the rest of PostgreSQL. If you're using the version of PostgreSQL that came with your Linux distro, you might need to install a package called postgresql-contrib.
dblink() -- executes a query in a remote database
dblink executes a query (usually a SELECT, but it can be any SQL
statement that returns rows) in a remote database.
When two text arguments are given, the first one is first looked up as
a persistent connection's name; if found, the command is executed on
that connection. If not found, the first argument is treated as a
connection info string as for dblink_connect, and the indicated
connection is made just for the duration of this command.
one of the good example:
SELECT *
FROM table1 tb1
LEFT JOIN (
SELECT *
FROM dblink('dbname=db2','SELECT id, code FROM table2')
AS tb2(id int, code text);
) AS tb2 ON tb2.column = tb1.column;
Note: I am giving this information for future reference. Reference
I have run into this before an came to the same conclusion about cross database queries as you. What I ended up doing was using schemas to divide the table space that way I could keep the tables grouped but still query them all.
Just to add a bit more information.
There is no way to query a database other than the current one. Because PostgreSQL loads database-specific system catalogs, it is uncertain how a cross-database query should even behave.
contrib/dblink allows cross-database queries using function calls. Of course, a client can also make simultaneous connections to different databases and merge the results on the client side.
PostgreSQL FAQ
Yes, you can by using DBlink (postgresql only) and DBI-Link (allows foreign cross database queriers) and TDS_LInk which allows queries to be run against MS SQL server.
I have used DB-Link and TDS-link before with great success.
I have checked and tried to create a foreign key relationships between 2 tables in 2 different databases using both dblink and postgres_fdw but with no result.
Having read the other peoples feedback on this, for example here and here and in some other sources it looks like there is no way to do that currently:
The dblink and postgres_fdw indeed enable one to connect to and query tables in other databases, which is not possible with the standard Postgres, but they do not allow to establish foreign key relationships between tables in different databases.
If performance is important and most queries are read-only, I would suggest to replicate data over to another database. While this seems like unneeded duplication of data, it might help if indexes are required.
This can be done with simple on insert triggers which in turn call dblink to update another copy. There are also full-blown replication options (like Slony) but that's off-topic.
see https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com/en/joining-data-from-multiple-postgres-databases/ [published 2017]
These days you also have the option to use https://prestodb.io/
You can run SQL on that PrestoDB node and it will distribute the SQL query as required. It can connect to the same node twice for different databases, or it might be connecting to different nodes on different hosts.
It does not support:
DELETE
ALTER TABLE
CREATE TABLE (CREATE TABLE AS is supported)
GRANT
REVOKE
SHOW GRANTS
SHOW ROLES
SHOW ROLE GRANTS
So you should only use it for SELECT and JOIN needs. Connect directly to each database for the above needs. (It looks like you can also INSERT or UPDATE which is nice)
Client applications connect to PrestoDB primarily using JDBC, but other types of connection are possible including a Tableu compatible web API
This is an open source tool governed by the Linux Foundation and Presto Foundation.
The founding members of the Presto Foundation are: Facebook, Uber,
Twitter, and Alibaba.
The current members are: Facebook, Uber, Twitter, Alibaba, Alluxio,
Ahana, Upsolver, and Intel.
In case someone needs a more involved example on how to do cross-database queries, here's an example that cleans up the databasechangeloglock table on every database that has it:
CREATE EXTENSION IF NOT EXISTS dblink;
DO
$$
DECLARE database_name TEXT;
DECLARE conn_template TEXT;
DECLARE conn_string TEXT;
DECLARE table_exists Boolean;
BEGIN
conn_template = 'user=myuser password=mypass dbname=';
FOR database_name IN
SELECT datname FROM pg_database
WHERE datistemplate = false
LOOP
conn_string = conn_template || database_name;
table_exists = (select table_exists_ from dblink(conn_string, '(select Count(*) > 0 from information_schema.tables where table_name = ''databasechangeloglock'')') as (table_exists_ Boolean));
IF table_exists THEN
perform dblink_exec(conn_string, 'delete from databasechangeloglock');
END IF;
END LOOP;
END
$$