显示标签为“http”的博文。显示所有博文
显示标签为“http”的博文。显示所有博文

2012年3月29日星期四

Display a report in fullscreenmode

Hello,
is it possible to open a report in fullscreenmode automatically? Perhaps there might be a http parameter?

Current view:

Now a click on the button on the right side. This is the view i want to see when i open a report.

Did anyone have an idea how i can achieve my goal?

Thanks for your help!
Christian Niehaves

Use the url http://servername/ReportServer instead of http://servername/Reports|||Great.
Thanks for your help.

2012年3月7日星期三

Disadvantages in using cube partitions

Hello,
Could anyone tell me if there are any disadvantages in using partitions
in cubes ?
Thanks
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!
1) they are an Enterprise Edition feature, thus they involve additional
upfront costs.
2) they are more difficult to maintain -- see the SSAS Operations Guide at:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro.../anservog.mspx
You will see that there are lots of interesting "gotchas" if you don't
maintain the data slice, etc. So they involve more administrative overhead.
However, personally I feel that their benefits more than out-weigh the
costs. See the SSAS Performance Guide for additional information on the
benefits:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro.../ansvcspg.mspx
There is also an excellent chapter on the importance of partitioning in the
SQL Server 2000 Resource Kit.
Dave Wickert [MSFT]
dwickert@.online.microsoft.com
Program Manager
BI SystemsTeam
SQL BI Product Unit (Analysis Services)
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"anonymous red" <anonymousrd@.yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:OCj6zjDuEHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> Could anyone tell me if there are any disadvantages in using partitions
> in cubes ?
> Thanks
>
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
> Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!
|||In fact I have a cube of size 100 MB with about 8 dimensions that
contains data for 24 months. There are only isolated reports that do not
use the whole 24 months data altogether. In fact, the time taken for the
processing of the cube or the complexity of development does not matter
much for my case: the main focus is access time on reports. What I would
like to know is that how I can have an idea of how much the majority of
my reports (which are based on the 24 months altogether) will suffer if
I start managing partitions in my cube based on the time dimension.
Basically, how significant is the overhead for a query consuming data
across all the members of a dimension when the cube bears N partitions
based on that dimension itself as compared to a single partition or to
how many number of partitions per MB of a cube does this overhead become
an issue.
I would be most grateful if you could provide me with some information
pertaining to the above issues.
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!
|||100MB is so small that I doubt if you will see any real advantage or
disadvantage of partitioning. If it was 100GB then we'd have a worthwhile
discussion, but 100MB is just too small to see anything.
Dave Wickert [MSFT]
dwickert@.online.microsoft.com
Program Manager
BI SystemsTeam
SQL BI Product Unit (Analysis Services)
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"anonymous red" <anonymousrd@.yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:O$%23$nbpuEHA.228@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> In fact I have a cube of size 100 MB with about 8 dimensions that
> contains data for 24 months. There are only isolated reports that do not
> use the whole 24 months data altogether. In fact, the time taken for the
> processing of the cube or the complexity of development does not matter
> much for my case: the main focus is access time on reports. What I would
> like to know is that how I can have an idea of how much the majority of
> my reports (which are based on the 24 months altogether) will suffer if
> I start managing partitions in my cube based on the time dimension.
> Basically, how significant is the overhead for a query consuming data
> across all the members of a dimension when the cube bears N partitions
> based on that dimension itself as compared to a single partition or to
> how many number of partitions per MB of a cube does this overhead become
> an issue.
>
> I would be most grateful if you could provide me with some information
> pertaining to the above issues.
>
>
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
> Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!

Disadvantages in using cube partitions

Hello,
Could anyone tell me if there are any disadvantages in using partitions
in cubes ?
Thanks
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!1) they are an Enterprise Edition feature, thus they involve additional
upfront costs.
2) they are more difficult to maintain -- see the SSAS Operations Guide at:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...n/anservog.mspx
You will see that there are lots of interesting "gotchas" if you don't
maintain the data slice, etc. So they involve more administrative overhead.
However, personally I feel that their benefits more than out-weigh the
costs. See the SSAS Performance Guide for additional information on the
benefits:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...n/ansvcspg.mspx
There is also an excellent chapter on the importance of partitioning in the
SQL Server 2000 Resource Kit.
--
Dave Wickert [MSFT]
dwickert@.online.microsoft.com
Program Manager
BI SystemsTeam
SQL BI Product Unit (Analysis Services)
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"anonymous red" <anonymousrd@.yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:OCj6zjDuEHA.3320@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> Could anyone tell me if there are any disadvantages in using partitions
> in cubes ?
> Thanks
>
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
> Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!|||In fact I have a cube of size 100 MB with about 8 dimensions that
contains data for 24 months. There are only isolated reports that do not
use the whole 24 months data altogether. In fact, the time taken for the
processing of the cube or the complexity of development does not matter
much for my case: the main focus is access time on reports. What I would
like to know is that how I can have an idea of how much the majority of
my reports (which are based on the 24 months altogether) will suffer if
I start managing partitions in my cube based on the time dimension.
Basically, how significant is the overhead for a query consuming data
across all the members of a dimension when the cube bears N partitions
based on that dimension itself as compared to a single partition or to
how many number of partitions per MB of a cube does this overhead become
an issue.
I would be most grateful if you could provide me with some information
pertaining to the above issues.
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!|||100MB is so small that I doubt if you will see any real advantage or
disadvantage of partitioning. If it was 100GB then we'd have a worthwhile
discussion, but 100MB is just too small to see anything.
--
Dave Wickert [MSFT]
dwickert@.online.microsoft.com
Program Manager
BI SystemsTeam
SQL BI Product Unit (Analysis Services)
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"anonymous red" <anonymousrd@.yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:O$%23$nbpuEHA.228@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> In fact I have a cube of size 100 MB with about 8 dimensions that
> contains data for 24 months. There are only isolated reports that do not
> use the whole 24 months data altogether. In fact, the time taken for the
> processing of the cube or the complexity of development does not matter
> much for my case: the main focus is access time on reports. What I would
> like to know is that how I can have an idea of how much the majority of
> my reports (which are based on the 24 months altogether) will suffer if
> I start managing partitions in my cube based on the time dimension.
> Basically, how significant is the overhead for a query consuming data
> across all the members of a dimension when the cube bears N partitions
> based on that dimension itself as compared to a single partition or to
> how many number of partitions per MB of a cube does this overhead become
> an issue.
>
> I would be most grateful if you could provide me with some information
> pertaining to the above issues.
>
>
> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.codecomments.com ***
> Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!

2012年2月25日星期六

Disabling NetBIOS from private/heartbeat NICs after SQL Server installation

In document "Installation order for SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition
on Microsoft Cluster Server"
(http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q243218/), as one of the
pre-installation checklist tasks it states "You have disabled NetBIOS
for all private network cards before you start the SQL Server Setup
program."
Here is the thing, our NT Admin. configured the cluster service and
installed SQL Server with the NetBIOS enabled. We know we can change
this setting after the fact but we don't know if there are any
repercussions to doing this? Does anybody have any insight into making
this post-facto installation change?
It shouldn't hurt anything on the heartbeat cable.
dw
Hope it helps
dw
_______________________________
Don Wilwol
donwilwol(DELETE)@.yahoo.com
http://spaces.msn.com/members/wilwol/
"Sean" <spowell71@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1125431374.514801.234000@.g44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> In document "Installation order for SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition
> on Microsoft Cluster Server"
> (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q243218/), as one of the
> pre-installation checklist tasks it states "You have disabled NetBIOS
> for all private network cards before you start the SQL Server Setup
> program."
> Here is the thing, our NT Admin. configured the cluster service and
> installed SQL Server with the NetBIOS enabled. We know we can change
> this setting after the fact but we don't know if there are any
> repercussions to doing this? Does anybody have any insight into making
> this post-facto installation change?
>
|||For the Private, this is a best practice, it won't hurt a thing!
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website
http://msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training
http://msmvps.com/clustering/archive.../20/58233.aspx NYC Clustering
class
"Sean" <spowell71@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1125431374.514801.234000@.g44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> In document "Installation order for SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition
> on Microsoft Cluster Server"
> (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q243218/), as one of the
> pre-installation checklist tasks it states "You have disabled NetBIOS
> for all private network cards before you start the SQL Server Setup
> program."
> Here is the thing, our NT Admin. configured the cluster service and
> installed SQL Server with the NetBIOS enabled. We know we can change
> this setting after the fact but we don't know if there are any
> repercussions to doing this? Does anybody have any insight into making
> this post-facto installation change?
>
|||Thanks, it worked out great for us. There is a big stability difference
NetBIOS disabled.

2012年2月14日星期二

disable Directory Browsing in http://<serverName>/reportServer

Hi,

How do I disable Directory Browsing in http://<serverName>/reportServer.

regards

Mário

What do you mean? Do you only want administrators to be able to access the reportserver URL? Or are you saying noone should be able to access it?|||Is it possible to make it no available to anyone?

|||In IIS Manager, under the virtual directory created by SSRS, the first tab (Virtual Directory) when you right click->properties will have a checkbox option to disable directory browsing.|||I try it, but it didn't work.

disable Directory Browsing in http://<serverName>/reportServer

Hi,

How do I disable Directory Browsing in http://<serverName>/reportServer.

regards

Mário

What do you mean? Do you only want administrators to be able to access the reportserver URL? Or are you saying noone should be able to access it?|||Is it possible to make it no available to anyone?

|||In IIS Manager, under the virtual directory created by SSRS, the first tab (Virtual Directory) when you right click->properties will have a checkbox option to disable directory browsing.|||I try it, but it didn't work.