Hide Parameters issue : Where is the "Prompt User" checkbox

I have a problem of hiding a few of my parameters. People are talking
about the SP1 and the "Prompt User" check box. I have SP1 installed.
But I cannot see "Prompt User" checkbox anywhere either in the
ReportManager or the VS.NET Report Designer.
I've been pulling my hair all day. Please let me know how can I get to
that "Prompt User" checkbox. Where is it ?
thanks
Anand SagarThere is not a check box. Make sure your report is highlighted. Click on
the Report option in the menu. Select properties. To set a parameter as
hidden, you have to delete all the text in the "Prompt:" textbox. Once you
do that, you will not see a prompt for the user to enter data for that
parameter. This is all that is needed to "hide" parameters from the end user.
"Anand Sagar" wrote:
> I have a problem of hiding a few of my parameters. People are talking
> about the SP1 and the "Prompt User" check box. I have SP1 installed.
> But I cannot see "Prompt User" checkbox anywhere either in the
> ReportManager or the VS.NET Report Designer.
> I've been pulling my hair all day. Please let me know how can I get to
> that "Prompt User" checkbox. Where is it ?
>
> thanks
> Anand Sagar
>|||There is a "Prompt User" check box in SP1. When you've uploaded your report
to the Report Manager, you'll need to edit the "Parameters" properties.
Check the "Prompt User" check box, then empty out the Prompt String text
box. This allows the parameter to be hidden from the user, but still
updateable by the report.
HTH,
Brian
"bspann" <bspann@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1F78D438-DDE9-4725-A474-A7BC7FDE880D@.microsoft.com...
> There is not a check box. Make sure your report is highlighted. Click on
> the Report option in the menu. Select properties. To set a parameter as
> hidden, you have to delete all the text in the "Prompt:" textbox. Once
you
> do that, you will not see a prompt for the user to enter data for that
> parameter. This is all that is needed to "hide" parameters from the end
user.
> "Anand Sagar" wrote:
> > I have a problem of hiding a few of my parameters. People are talking
> > about the SP1 and the "Prompt User" check box. I have SP1 installed.
> > But I cannot see "Prompt User" checkbox anywhere either in the
> > ReportManager or the VS.NET Report Designer.
> > I've been pulling my hair all day. Please let me know how can I get to
> > that "Prompt User" checkbox. Where is it ?
> >
> >
> > thanks
> > Anand Sagar
> >|||In Report Manager, select the report, select the properties tab, select the
parameters sub-tab.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights
"bspann" <bspann@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1F78D438-DDE9-4725-A474-A7BC7FDE880D@.microsoft.com...
> There is not a check box. Make sure your report is highlighted. Click on
> the Report option in the menu. Select properties. To set a parameter as
> hidden, you have to delete all the text in the "Prompt:" textbox. Once
you
> do that, you will not see a prompt for the user to enter data for that
> parameter. This is all that is needed to "hide" parameters from the end
user.
> "Anand Sagar" wrote:
> > I have a problem of hiding a few of my parameters. People are talking
> > about the SP1 and the "Prompt User" check box. I have SP1 installed.
> > But I cannot see "Prompt User" checkbox anywhere either in the
> > ReportManager or the VS.NET Report Designer.
> > I've been pulling my hair all day. Please let me know how can I get to
> > that "Prompt User" checkbox. Where is it ?
> >
> >
> > thanks
> > Anand Sagar
> >sql

Hide Parameters from User.

Hi,
Is there any way that the parameters passed from the URL is not shown to the users. Making the "Prompt User" unchecked and passing the parameter through the URL gave some error. Is there a work around.
Thanks.
--
Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.comTry appending this to your URL:
&rc:Parameters=false
"Prashanth Rao via SQLMonster.com" wrote:
> Hi,
> Is there any way that the parameters passed from the URL is not shown to the users. Making the "Prompt User" unchecked and passing the parameter through the URL gave some error. Is there a work around.
> Thanks.
> --
> Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com
>

Hide From Print

Hi,
I would like to exclude some fields from printing, but they have to be
visible for the user in IE.
Is this possible?
tx,
Hippo
Greetz,
Hippo from [NL]
--
remove xxx from mailHippo, have you figured this out yet. I want to do the exact same thing but
have not been able to do it.
If you have please let me know how you did it.
Thank you,
Fred
"hippo" wrote:
> Hi,
> I would like to exclude some fields from printing, but they have to be
> visible for the user in IE.
> Is this possible?
> tx,
> Hippo
> Greetz,
> Hippo from [NL]
> --
> remove xxx from mail
>

hide field from user

I have an app that connects to sqlepress. When run the field are loaded from the db. There are some fields that I don't want some of the users to see. Is there a way to do this without hardcoding the 'username' in the applicaton ?

I looked at the explicit permissions for username for the particular table, but I don't understand some of the terms listed.

Alter

Control

References

View definition

Normally you do this by creating a View that exposes just the columns that you want to show to the users. I don't know of any way to control column level access by user, particularly if you don't tell SQL who the users is. I would say that you create specific groups to control access level, then build Views with the right set of columns for each group. Then you can call the appropriate View based on the group membership.

Mike

sql

Hide Dropdown parameter values based on User

I need to hide dropdown parameter values based on UserId. Any help with
User!UserId and custom code will be helpful. This is a Non-queried dropdown
and not based on query/dataset.
Thanks!To show either with drop down or without drop down, is not present in RS.
you didnt mention if it is not there, then do what ? means whether you want
emtpy or with one value or it should not show the drop down instead it should
run the report directly with some default values.
A round about way is to have a plain menu sort of report where you have two
options, I mean here is that when ever user clicks the reports, a screen will
be there with menu options like two hyperlinks (can be done using action)
before that you need to create a copy of the report, so you have now two
same reports one with drop down and the other without drop down.
Now depending on the user you can select or hide the textbox itself so the
user will be left with selecting one option.
If you dont understand I will put it in other words.
Before your two reports (one with dropdown and the other without dropdown)
one plain just hyperlink report will be there, where in user will select
the link to go to the respective reports.
Let me know if you have doubts.
Amarnath, MCTS
"RAGHAVAN JAYARAMAN" wrote:
> I need to hide dropdown parameter values based on UserId. Any help with
> User!UserId and custom code will be helpful. This is a Non-queried dropdown
> and not based on query/dataset.
> Thanks!|||On Mar 14, 3:01 am, Amarnath <Amarn...@.discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote:
> To show either with drop down or without drop down, is not present in RS.
> you didnt mention if it is not there, then do what ? means whether you want
> emtpy or with one value or it should not show the drop down instead it should
> run the report directly with some default values.
> A round about way is to have a plain menu sort of report where you have two
> options, I mean here is that when ever user clicks the reports, a screen will
> be there with menu options like two hyperlinks (can be done using action)
> before that you need to create a copy of the report, so you have now two
> same reports one with drop down and the other without drop down.
> Now depending on the user you can select or hide the textbox itself so the
> user will be left with selecting one option.
> If you dont understand I will put it in other words.
> Before your two reports (one with dropdown and the other without dropdown)
> one plain just hyperlink report will be there, where in user will select
> the link to go to the respective reports.
> Let me know if you have doubts.
> Amarnath, MCTS
> "RAGHAVAN JAYARAMAN" wrote:
> > I need to hide dropdown parameter values based on UserId. Any help with
> > User!UserId and custom code will be helpful. This is a Non-queried dropdown
> > and not based on query/dataset.
> > Thanks!
Another way of doing it is to use '=User!UserID.ToString' as the input
parameter to the dataset (stored procedure/query) and in the stored
procedure/query, give a default value when UserID matches certain
criteria. Hope this helps.
Regards,
Enrique Martinez
Sr. SQL Server Developer|||I guess i didn't mention properly, In this case say for instance User 1 , i
would want to display 2 values and for user 2 i would want to display 5 value
on the dropdown.
However if use a query dataset , then i could pass UserId as per Enrique
suggestion.
Thanks!
"EMartinez" wrote:
> On Mar 14, 3:01 am, Amarnath <Amarn...@.discussions.microsoft.com>
> wrote:
> > To show either with drop down or without drop down, is not present in RS.
> > you didnt mention if it is not there, then do what ? means whether you want
> > emtpy or with one value or it should not show the drop down instead it should
> > run the report directly with some default values.
> > A round about way is to have a plain menu sort of report where you have two
> > options, I mean here is that when ever user clicks the reports, a screen will
> > be there with menu options like two hyperlinks (can be done using action)
> > before that you need to create a copy of the report, so you have now two
> > same reports one with drop down and the other without drop down.
> > Now depending on the user you can select or hide the textbox itself so the
> > user will be left with selecting one option.
> > If you dont understand I will put it in other words.
> >
> > Before your two reports (one with dropdown and the other without dropdown)
> > one plain just hyperlink report will be there, where in user will select
> > the link to go to the respective reports.
> > Let me know if you have doubts.
> >
> > Amarnath, MCTS
> >
> > "RAGHAVAN JAYARAMAN" wrote:
> > > I need to hide dropdown parameter values based on UserId. Any help with
> > > User!UserId and custom code will be helpful. This is a Non-queried dropdown
> > > and not based on query/dataset.
> >
> > > Thanks!
> Another way of doing it is to use '=User!UserID.ToString' as the input
> parameter to the dataset (stored procedure/query) and in the stored
> procedure/query, give a default value when UserID matches certain
> criteria. Hope this helps.
> Regards,
> Enrique Martinez
> Sr. SQL Server Developer
>|||Ok, So in that case the query which you have for displaying the drop down,
you can pass user id and get the filtered records depending on the user. But
you need to have queried drop down only. Otherwise it is not possible on a
non queried.
Amarnath, MCTS
"RAGHAVAN JAYARAMAN" wrote:
> I guess i didn't mention properly, In this case say for instance User 1 , i
> would want to display 2 values and for user 2 i would want to display 5 value
> on the dropdown.
> However if use a query dataset , then i could pass UserId as per Enrique
> suggestion.
> Thanks!
> "EMartinez" wrote:
> > On Mar 14, 3:01 am, Amarnath <Amarn...@.discussions.microsoft.com>
> > wrote:
> > > To show either with drop down or without drop down, is not present in RS.
> > > you didnt mention if it is not there, then do what ? means whether you want
> > > emtpy or with one value or it should not show the drop down instead it should
> > > run the report directly with some default values.
> > > A round about way is to have a plain menu sort of report where you have two
> > > options, I mean here is that when ever user clicks the reports, a screen will
> > > be there with menu options like two hyperlinks (can be done using action)
> > > before that you need to create a copy of the report, so you have now two
> > > same reports one with drop down and the other without drop down.
> > > Now depending on the user you can select or hide the textbox itself so the
> > > user will be left with selecting one option.
> > > If you dont understand I will put it in other words.
> > >
> > > Before your two reports (one with dropdown and the other without dropdown)
> > > one plain just hyperlink report will be there, where in user will select
> > > the link to go to the respective reports.
> > > Let me know if you have doubts.
> > >
> > > Amarnath, MCTS
> > >
> > > "RAGHAVAN JAYARAMAN" wrote:
> > > > I need to hide dropdown parameter values based on UserId. Any help with
> > > > User!UserId and custom code will be helpful. This is a Non-queried dropdown
> > > > and not based on query/dataset.
> > >
> > > > Thanks!
> >
> > Another way of doing it is to use '=User!UserID.ToString' as the input
> > parameter to the dataset (stored procedure/query) and in the stored
> > procedure/query, give a default value when UserID matches certain
> > criteria. Hope this helps.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Enrique Martinez
> > Sr. SQL Server Developer
> >
> >

Hide dimension members which have no rows in fact table

When a cube is presented to the end user (thru Excel or Reporting services), I would like to limit the available dimension members to only those which have at least one row in fact table. This is to simplify what user sees as a list of choices under a dimension attribute/hierarchy and not be overwhelmed with all the dimension members for which no data may exist in reality in the fact table. Does Analysis Services 2005 have any easy way to accomplish this as part of UDM/Cube design?

Let me give you an example. Take "Locations" role playing dimension. In ocean transportation business, "Locations" are of different types such as Port of Load (sea-port), Port of Discharge (sea-port), Inland Point of origin, Inland Point of destination etc. Sea-ports are only few (5 to 10) where as inland locations are in thousands. The entire list of locations, which includes locations which may not have had any shipment booked till date, may be even bigger. To keep the ETL simple, we want to keep one central dimension table for all location roles. However, for cube query selection purposes, users want to see a simple and compact list of Port of Load locations for which bookings have been made (i.e., data exists in fact table with those Port Of Load locations) - for example.

One possible solution is... to use one view for each location role in the UDM and setup relationships from fact table column to these individual location views, where the view joins Location dimension table with the fact table to select only those locations that exist in the fact table. Is this a good approach? Will there be any performance impact in Cube processing or end user cube query performance because of using views like this (since view is run every time it is referenced on the fly to generate the result set)?

Another solution is... to have separate dimension tables for each location role with only those members that are used in fact table records. But this complicates the ETL due to lot of redundancy. Will it give any performance advantage since it uses a permanent table versus view in UDM (data source view)?

Please share your insights on the best ways of handling this problem in SQL Server 2005. Thank you!

Hello. The standard behaviour you are looking for is the standard behaviour in a TSQL inner join. So if you make a report in SSRS2005 and use TSQL with your data mart / data warehouse as a source, you will only see connected records in the dimensions and the fact table.

A cube is more like a crossjoin in TSQL. If you crossjoin two tables in TSQL you will get all combinations of members in the tables. This is standard behaviour in SSAS2005.

But within a dimension table in SSAS2005 you have a new feature, only within the dimension, called autoexist, that will only show combinations of members like a TSQL inner join of members. Within a dimension, in the previous version of SSAS (2000), you would get a TSQL-crossjoin of all members within a dimension.

If you combine sea-ports and inland destinations, in the same dimension(in SSAS2005), you will get an inner join of dimension member combinations(autoexists). If you put them as separate dimensions you will miss autoexist.

To reduce empty cells in the grid(in a SSAS2005 cube) you will have to add NonEmpty or Non Empty in MDX in order to not show empty cells. Many clients can help help you with this by having a button to hide empty rows and columns in the grid.

There are many more superior MDX experts, on this forum, that can explain this even further.

HTH

Thomas Ivarsson

|||

Hello. Auto exist does not have anything to do with data in the fact table. Auto exist is a dimensional concept only. Auto-exist only pertains to the attributes in the same dimension. If we separate the datasources (either using view or permanent table) for each location role dimension, then with in any single location role dimension, "auto exist" is still effective across the attributes of that dimension. My problem has to do with not wanting to see the dimension members if they (dimension key) are not present in the fact table data. Thanks for the reply. Appreciate it.

|||

I have tried to tell you about the behavior of Autoexist if you read my post carefully. You have also an explanation for the dimension and fact problem.

Autoexist is not new to me either.

Regards

Thomas Ivarsson

|||

Shan,

If I understand your requirement correctly, you have one Locations dimension table, but you use that single dimension within your UDM in different roles. In each of its roles, you want the dimension to have a different set of members based on whether or not the members exist within a related fact table or not. Is that correct?

If that is the case, then I believe your best option is to create different views (or named queries in the DSV) on top fo the Locations dimension table that handle the inner join to each related fact table. Then, in the UDM, set up separate dimensions on top of each view and relate each dimension to each fact table/measure group as appropriate.

There will be some performance implications to doing this. For example, you'll be running similar (or even the exact same) queries agains the Locations dimension table as you process each of the separate dimensions in the UDM. So, if you have a lot of them and/or if the joins to the fact tables within the views or named queries are expensive, you'll be adding processing time. Once processing is complete, however, I don't think query performance against any given measure group within the UDM will be any different than if you had a single dimension that was being used as a role-playing dimenision within the cube.

HTH,

Dave Fackler

|||

Dave,

That's correct summary of my requirement. We will proceed with this recommended solution. Thank you. I was not sure whether Analysis Services has some built-in support to meet this common need which does not require separating data sources (view or separate table) since that approach takes some additional work! Trying to find an easier or better way since this question applies to many dimension tables in our data warehouse (both simple and role playing dimensions)... :-) Now I understand that there is no such easy way (out of the box support).

If I am right, the added performance time you mentioned impacts the cube processing step time during ETL job run. That's okay.

sql

Hide dimension members which have no rows in fact table

When a cube is presented to the end user (thru Excel or Reporting services), I would like to limit the available dimension members to only those which have at least one row in fact table. This is to simplify what user sees as a list of choices under a dimension attribute/hierarchy and not be overwhelmed with all the dimension members for which no data may exist in reality in the fact table. Does Analysis Services 2005 have any easy way to accomplish this as part of UDM/Cube design?

Let me give you an example. Take "Locations" role playing dimension. In ocean transportation business, "Locations" are of different types such as Port of Load (sea-port), Port of Discharge (sea-port), Inland Point of origin, Inland Point of destination etc. Sea-ports are only few (5 to 10) where as inland locations are in thousands. The entire list of locations, which includes locations which may not have had any shipment booked till date, may be even bigger. To keep the ETL simple, we want to keep one central dimension table for all location roles. However, for cube query selection purposes, users want to see a simple and compact list of Port of Load locations for which bookings have been made (i.e., data exists in fact table with those Port Of Load locations) - for example.

One possible solution is... to use one view for each location role in the UDM and setup relationships from fact table column to these individual location views, where the view joins Location dimension table with the fact table to select only those locations that exist in the fact table. Is this a good approach? Will there be any performance impact in Cube processing or end user cube query performance because of using views like this (since view is run every time it is referenced on the fly to generate the result set)?

Another solution is... to have separate dimension tables for each location role with only those members that are used in fact table records. But this complicates the ETL due to lot of redundancy. Will it give any performance advantage since it uses a permanent table versus view in UDM (data source view)?

Please share your insights on the best ways of handling this problem in SQL Server 2005. Thank you!

Hello. The standard behaviour you are looking for is the standard behaviour in a TSQL inner join. So if you make a report in SSRS2005 and use TSQL with your data mart / data warehouse as a source, you will only see connected records in the dimensions and the fact table.

A cube is more like a crossjoin in TSQL. If you crossjoin two tables in TSQL you will get all combinations of members in the tables. This is standard behaviour in SSAS2005.

But within a dimension table in SSAS2005 you have a new feature, only within the dimension, called autoexist, that will only show combinations of members like a TSQL inner join of members. Within a dimension, in the previous version of SSAS (2000), you would get a TSQL-crossjoin of all members within a dimension.

If you combine sea-ports and inland destinations, in the same dimension(in SSAS2005), you will get an inner join of dimension member combinations(autoexists). If you put them as separate dimensions you will miss autoexist.

To reduce empty cells in the grid(in a SSAS2005 cube) you will have to add NonEmpty or Non Empty in MDX in order to not show empty cells. Many clients can help help you with this by having a button to hide empty rows and columns in the grid.

There are many more superior MDX experts, on this forum, that can explain this even further.

HTH

Thomas Ivarsson

|||

Hello. Auto exist does not have anything to do with data in the fact table. Auto exist is a dimensional concept only. Auto-exist only pertains to the attributes in the same dimension. If we separate the datasources (either using view or permanent table) for each location role dimension, then with in any single location role dimension, "auto exist" is still effective across the attributes of that dimension. My problem has to do with not wanting to see the dimension members if they (dimension key) are not present in the fact table data. Thanks for the reply. Appreciate it.

|||

I have tried to tell you about the behavior of Autoexist if you read my post carefully. You have also an explanation for the dimension and fact problem.

Autoexist is not new to me either.

Regards

Thomas Ivarsson

|||

Shan,

If I understand your requirement correctly, you have one Locations dimension table, but you use that single dimension within your UDM in different roles. In each of its roles, you want the dimension to have a different set of members based on whether or not the members exist within a related fact table or not. Is that correct?

If that is the case, then I believe your best option is to create different views (or named queries in the DSV) on top fo the Locations dimension table that handle the inner join to each related fact table. Then, in the UDM, set up separate dimensions on top of each view and relate each dimension to each fact table/measure group as appropriate.

There will be some performance implications to doing this. For example, you'll be running similar (or even the exact same) queries agains the Locations dimension table as you process each of the separate dimensions in the UDM. So, if you have a lot of them and/or if the joins to the fact tables within the views or named queries are expensive, you'll be adding processing time. Once processing is complete, however, I don't think query performance against any given measure group within the UDM will be any different than if you had a single dimension that was being used as a role-playing dimenision within the cube.

HTH,

Dave Fackler

|||

Dave,

That's correct summary of my requirement. We will proceed with this recommended solution. Thank you. I was not sure whether Analysis Services has some built-in support to meet this common need which does not require separating data sources (view or separate table) since that approach takes some additional work! Trying to find an easier or better way since this question applies to many dimension tables in our data warehouse (both simple and role playing dimensions)... :-) Now I understand that there is no such easy way (out of the box support).

If I am right, the added performance time you mentioned impacts the cube processing step time during ETL job run. That's okay.

Hide Dcoument Map by Default while viewing the Report in SSRS

Hello Experts

I use a Report where i have a document Map getting generated. but by default it is displayed and the user has to close the window to view the report. i wanted to know if its possible to hide the Document map window by default and based on the click of the icon the window will be show to the user when viewing in the default Report page.

/chandresh soni

Did you already try the URL access parameter: rc:DocMap=false ?

HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de|||

Hi Jens

Thanks for your suggestion. but i cannot expect my user to type rc:DocMap=false in the URL. as i deploy the report on the Report server and the user view the same through Report Manager.

since the Report has a document map, it covers 25 % of the main screen. so i wanted a way that by default it should be hidden and only on the click of the icon in the Toolbar it should be visible.

i appreciate if you can help me find the solution

/Soni

|||

I have the same problem

Soni-- Did you get the solution?

|||

Another 'poor sool' experiencing this 'feature(?)'.

Any solutions yet ?

|||

I created a report with Document Map on (from Matrix Textbox Properties | Navigation tab) and the same report without Document Map. Saved both and searched for differences in the resulting rdl files. This helped me to find the problem in my original report. Removing the Label element in the Grouping part of the Matrix element removed also the Document Map icon from my reports.This is an extract of the changed rdl file.

Before:

<Grouping Name="PersonGroup">
<Label>=Fields!Person.Value</Label>
<GroupExpressions>
<GroupExpression>=Fields!Person.Value</GroupExpression>
</GroupExpressions>
</Grouping>

After:

<Grouping Name="PersonGroup">
<GroupExpressions>
<GroupExpression>=Fields!Person.Value</GroupExpression>
</GroupExpressions>
</Grouping>

This must be some bug wit the Layout-UI not synchronizing with the rdl file, because the Document Map label was definitily NOT set in the Navigation tab of the report that opened with Document Map default on.

sql

Hide Dcoument Map by Default while viewing the Report in SSRS

Hello Experts

I use a Report where i have a document Map getting generated. but by default it is displayed and the user has to close the window to view the report. i wanted to know if its possible to hide the Document map window by default and based on the click of the icon the window will be show to the user when viewing in the default Report page.

/chandresh soni

Did you already try the URL access parameter: rc:DocMap=false ?

HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de|||

Hi Jens

Thanks for your suggestion. but i cannot expect my user to type rc:DocMap=false in the URL. as i deploy the report on the Report server and the user view the same through Report Manager.

since the Report has a document map, it covers 25 % of the main screen. so i wanted a way that by default it should be hidden and only on the click of the icon in the Toolbar it should be visible.

i appreciate if you can help me find the solution

/Soni

|||

I have the same problem

Soni-- Did you get the solution?

|||

Another 'poor sool' experiencing this 'feature(?)'.

Any solutions yet ?

|||

I created a report with Document Map on (from Matrix Textbox Properties | Navigation tab) and the same report without Document Map. Saved both and searched for differences in the resulting rdl files. This helped me to find the problem in my original report. Removing the Label element in the Grouping part of the Matrix element removed also the Document Map icon from my reports.This is an extract of the changed rdl file.

Before:

<Grouping Name="PersonGroup">
<Label>=Fields!Person.Value</Label>
<GroupExpressions>
<GroupExpression>=Fields!Person.Value</GroupExpression>
</GroupExpressions>
</Grouping>

After:

<Grouping Name="PersonGroup">
<GroupExpressions>
<GroupExpression>=Fields!Person.Value</GroupExpression>
</GroupExpressions>
</Grouping>

This must be some bug wit the Layout-UI not synchronizing with the rdl file, because the Document Map label was definitily NOT set in the Navigation tab of the report that opened with Document Map default on.

Hide databases in SQL EM from dbo owner

If i create a new SQL login and give that login db ownership for a test db.
When that user adds my SQL Server through his own SQL EM, why does he/she
also see all other objects (databases, sql security logins, DTS, ...)?

Is there a way for the user to open SQL EM but only see his/her db and
nothing
more?

Thank youIn article <0Fp2d.21814$0h7.1558418@.news20.bellglobal.com>,
sergea@.nospam.ehmail.com says...
> If i create a new SQL login and give that login db ownership for a test db.
> When that user adds my SQL Server through his own SQL EM, why does he/she
> also see all other objects (databases, sql security logins, DTS, ...)?
> Is there a way for the user to open SQL EM but only see his/her db and
> nothing
> more?

Now you know why they call it "Enterprise Manager". If you don't want
someone gaining access to your database, and you don't trust the users
with SA access then you are screwed. Even if you did hide it, somehow,
the SA account can gain access to it.

Only DBA's should be using EM.

--
--
spamfree999@.rrohio.com
(Remove 999 to reply to me)|||On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 19:50:20 -0400, serge wrote:

>Is there a way for the user to open SQL EM but only see his/her db and
>nothing
>more?

Hi Serge,

Not as far as I know. This information is available in tables in the
master database that everybody has access to. EM presents it nicely, but
it's possible to retrieve the same information by executing some queries
in Query Analyzer, osql or any other tool.

Users can see the name of the database, but not the contents, so you
shouldn't be too worried about it (unless you have a database called
MyPlansToRipOffTheBoss - but you could always choose a less obvious name).

Best, Hugo
--

(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)|||Hi

EM is not really something you should be giving to just anybody! If you
really want to do this, then you may want to create a separate instance,
although this may be a heavy overhead if you require more than a couple.

John

"serge" <sergea@.nospam.ehmail.com> wrote in message
news:0Fp2d.21814$0h7.1558418@.news20.bellglobal.com ...
> If i create a new SQL login and give that login db ownership for a test
db.
> When that user adds my SQL Server through his own SQL EM, why does he/she
> also see all other objects (databases, sql security logins, DTS, ...)?
> Is there a way for the user to open SQL EM but only see his/her db and
> nothing
> more?
> Thank you|||Thank you for the responses.

What about this SQL Web Data Administrator that can be run
using IIS or VS.Net.

Has anyone tried this? If so, maybe through this web front-end, there
might be better ways to control which tools to show for the users?

Hide database names from unauthroized users in SSMS

If a user is not authorized to see a database can I exclude that database from even appearing in Management Studio for that user

TIA,

Barkingdog

Hi,

you would need to revove the permission 'VIEW ANY DATABASE' from the role PUBLIC.

HTH, Jens K. Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de|||

I found the server-level permission "View any database", denied it to the test user, and found exactly that. The user couldn't see (under SSMS) any databases whatsoever including the one he is the DBO of! How can I assign him permissions to see that one database but no others in the SSMS tree?

TIA,

Barkingdog

P.S. The evidence is if I removed that permission from "public" then no one -- maybe even the sa? - could see any databases in SSMS.!

|||

How are you making the user an owner? Are you making him a member of db_owner or are you using the alter authorization statement to make the user the actual owner of the database?

You can tell by looking at the owner_sid in sys.databases - the sid should point to the owning login. If the login is the owner of the database, denying that user view any database will not prevent him from viewing the database in sys.databases or Management Studio.

Jack Richins
SDE Sql Server

|||

I made him a member of the db_owner.

When I run

sp_helpuser <DBName>

it returns x01 as the SID for the username dbo.

When I run

use DBName

select * from sys.databases

it returns.......

0x010500000000000515000000AAB950D6A501....

for the owner sid of the database.

So the user is not the DBO (though he belongs to that role).

Then back to my original question. How can I deny a user from seeing any databses in the SSMS tree that he does not have permission to access?

TIA,

Barkingdog

|||

DENY VIEW ANY DATABASE to the test login. This prevents the user from seeing any databases for which the user is not the DBO. You can make the user a DBO by using ALTER AUTHORIZATION DATABASE::<database> TO <login>. Being a member of db_owner is not sufficient to see the database if "view any database" was denied.

This is not very clean and may not work for you if you can't make this user login the actual DBO of the database you want him to administer or have multiple logins you want to secure in this manner as only a single login can be the actual DBO of a database.

This is something we're investigating for future improvements. So if you could provide some details on what you would like this login to be able to do and what you don't want the login to see or do, it could help us better solve your problems as we design future versions of SQL Server. Also whether you use SQL Logins or Windows Integrated Logins - how many different logins you'd like to secure in this way, and anything else you think might be relevant.

Thanks,
Jack Richins
SDE SQL Server

|||

Dear Jack,

This whole issue took me by surprise. In our shop we have three teams of developers and all the development datbases are in a single sql instance. One of the group leaders asked me if there is any way to prevent those not in his group from even seeing the database display name under SSMS and sql tools (e.g. query editor, via OLEDB). I don't know the reason for his concern -- developers outside his group are not authorized to even view his databases but from a security perspective it seems reasonable: If a user does not have access to a databse, why should the database even "exist" for that user. This applies regardless of the form of Windows authentication used.

TIA,

Barkingdog

|||

Thanks, this isn't a scenario we'd been discussing so I'm glad you brought this up. I'm sorry we don't have a solution for you now, but hopefully in the future we can do something to enable this.

Thanks,
Jack Richins
SDE SQL Server

|||Although it blocks users from seeing other databases in the SMSS database dropdown, as the user I can still query sys.databases and see everything and I have used the deny view any database to public. In a hosting environment, this just won't be acceptable. In sql 2000, I just created a sysdatabases view that looked at your credentials and passed what you had rights to. Can't do that in 2005, but definately need this.|||

The main issue here is that determining what databases a user can see is an expensive check, as the permissions to access the database are stored in the database itself, so verifying them requires a database access. This prevents a general solution from being available through SSMS - some customers manage hundreds of databases on a single server, which would make such checks prohibitive.

You can still write a view in SQL Server 2005 that could filter rows using "has_dbaccess() = 1" as a predicate, but you should only do this if you have a limited number of databases, as it would be too expensive otherwise.

I also want to add that we're aware of this request and we're looking at ways to address it.

Thanks
Laurentiu

Hide database names from unauthroized users in SSMS

If a user is not authorized to see a database can I exclude that database from even appearing in Management Studio for that user

TIA,

Barkingdog

Hi,

you would need to revove the permission 'VIEW ANY DATABASE' from the role PUBLIC.

HTH, Jens K. Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de
|||

I found the server-level permission "View any database", denied it to the test user, and found exactly that. The user couldn't see (under SSMS) any databases whatsoever including the one he is the DBO of! How can I assign him permissions to see that one database but no others in the SSMS tree?

TIA,

Barkingdog

P.S. The evidence is if I removed that permission from "public" then no one -- maybe even the sa? - could see any databases in SSMS.!

|||

How are you making the user an owner? Are you making him a member of db_owner or are you using the alter authorization statement to make the user the actual owner of the database?

You can tell by looking at the owner_sid in sys.databases - the sid should point to the owning login. If the login is the owner of the database, denying that user view any database will not prevent him from viewing the database in sys.databases or Management Studio.

Jack Richins
SDE Sql Server

|||

I made him a member of the db_owner.

When I run

sp_helpuser <DBName>

it returns x01 as the SID for the username dbo.

When I run

use DBName

select * from sys.databases

it returns.......

0x010500000000000515000000AAB950D6A501....

for the owner sid of the database.

So the user is not the DBO (though he belongs to that role).

Then back to my original question. How can I deny a user from seeing any databses in the SSMS tree that he does not have permission to access?

TIA,

Barkingdog

|||

DENY VIEW ANY DATABASE to the test login. This prevents the user from seeing any databases for which the user is not the DBO. You can make the user a DBO by using ALTER AUTHORIZATION DATABASE::<database> TO <login>. Being a member of db_owner is not sufficient to see the database if "view any database" was denied.

This is not very clean and may not work for you if you can't make this user login the actual DBO of the database you want him to administer or have multiple logins you want to secure in this manner as only a single login can be the actual DBO of a database.

This is something we're investigating for future improvements. So if you could provide some details on what you would like this login to be able to do and what you don't want the login to see or do, it could help us better solve your problems as we design future versions of SQL Server. Also whether you use SQL Logins or Windows Integrated Logins - how many different logins you'd like to secure in this way, and anything else you think might be relevant.

Thanks,
Jack Richins
SDE SQL Server

|||

Dear Jack,

This whole issue took me by surprise. In our shop we have three teams of developers and all the development datbases are in a single sql instance. One of the group leaders asked me if there is any way to prevent those not in his group from even seeing the database display name under SSMS and sql tools (e.g. query editor, via OLEDB). I don't know the reason for his concern -- developers outside his group are not authorized to even view his databases but from a security perspective it seems reasonable: If a user does not have access to a databse, why should the database even "exist" for that user. This applies regardless of the form of Windows authentication used.

TIA,

Barkingdog

|||

Thanks, this isn't a scenario we'd been discussing so I'm glad you brought this up. I'm sorry we don't have a solution for you now, but hopefully in the future we can do something to enable this.

Thanks,
Jack Richins
SDE SQL Server

|||Although it blocks users from seeing other databases in the SMSS database dropdown, as the user I can still query sys.databases and see everything and I have used the deny view any database to public. In a hosting environment, this just won't be acceptable. In sql 2000, I just created a sysdatabases view that looked at your credentials and passed what you had rights to. Can't do that in 2005, but definately need this.|||

The main issue here is that determining what databases a user can see is an expensive check, as the permissions to access the database are stored in the database itself, so verifying them requires a database access. This prevents a general solution from being available through SSMS - some customers manage hundreds of databases on a single server, which would make such checks prohibitive.

You can still write a view in SQL Server 2005 that could filter rows using "has_dbaccess() = 1" as a predicate, but you should only do this if you have a limited number of databases, as it would be too expensive otherwise.

I also want to add that we're aware of this request and we're looking at ways to address it.

Thanks
Laurentiu

|||I have tried changing the view any database property, which works, but the user cannot see the databases that they own... is there something else that needs to be done for them to see these databases and no others?|||

This is what I ended up doing:

--SQL 2005

If @.@.version like 'Microsoft SQL Server 2005%'

Begin -- Create Login only if it doesn't exist:

IF NOT EXISTS (SELECT * FROM sys.server_principals WHERE [name] = @.Username)

Begin

Set @.dsql ='create login ' + @.Username + ' with password = N'''+ REPLACE(@.password, '''', '''''') + ''', DEFAULT_DATABASE=' + QUOTENAME(@.DBName) + ', CHECK_EXPIRATION=OFF, CHECK_POLICY=OFF'

execute (@.dsql)

set @.dsql = 'use master; GRANT CONNECT SQL TO ' + QUOTENAME(@.DBName)

execute( @.dsql )

End

--Deny ability to see anything other than master, tempdb and user database.

Set @.dsql = 'use master; deny VIEW any DATABASE to ' + @.Username

--Print @.dsql

execute (@.dsql)

End

--Add user as dbo to database.

Set @.dsql = @.DBName + '.dbo.sp_changedbowner ' + @.Username

--Print @.dsql

execute (@.dsql)

But, I don't think you can grant multiple user's to DBO, so you will only have one user that can see master, temp, and their database.

-Chuck Lathrope

Hide database names from unauthroized users in SSMS

If a user is not authorized to see a database can I exclude that database from even appearing in Management Studio for that user

TIA,

Barkingdog

Hi,

you would need to revove the permission 'VIEW ANY DATABASE' from the role PUBLIC.

HTH, Jens K. Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de|||

I found the server-level permission "View any database", denied it to the test user, and found exactly that. The user couldn't see (under SSMS) any databases whatsoever including the one he is the DBO of! How can I assign him permissions to see that one database but no others in the SSMS tree?

TIA,

Barkingdog

P.S. The evidence is if I removed that permission from "public" then no one -- maybe even the sa? - could see any databases in SSMS.!

|||

How are you making the user an owner? Are you making him a member of db_owner or are you using the alter authorization statement to make the user the actual owner of the database?

You can tell by looking at the owner_sid in sys.databases - the sid should point to the owning login. If the login is the owner of the database, denying that user view any database will not prevent him from viewing the database in sys.databases or Management Studio.

Jack Richins
SDE Sql Server

|||

I made him a member of the db_owner.

When I run

sp_helpuser <DBName>

it returns x01 as the SID for the username dbo.

When I run

use DBName

select * from sys.databases

it returns.......

0x010500000000000515000000AAB950D6A501....

for the owner sid of the database.

So the user is not the DBO (though he belongs to that role).

Then back to my original question. How can I deny a user from seeing any databses in the SSMS tree that he does not have permission to access?

TIA,

Barkingdog

|||

DENY VIEW ANY DATABASE to the test login. This prevents the user from seeing any databases for which the user is not the DBO. You can make the user a DBO by using ALTER AUTHORIZATION DATABASE::<database> TO <login>. Being a member of db_owner is not sufficient to see the database if "view any database" was denied.

This is not very clean and may not work for you if you can't make this user login the actual DBO of the database you want him to administer or have multiple logins you want to secure in this manner as only a single login can be the actual DBO of a database.

This is something we're investigating for future improvements. So if you could provide some details on what you would like this login to be able to do and what you don't want the login to see or do, it could help us better solve your problems as we design future versions of SQL Server. Also whether you use SQL Logins or Windows Integrated Logins - how many different logins you'd like to secure in this way, and anything else you think might be relevant.

Thanks,
Jack Richins
SDE SQL Server

|||

Dear Jack,

This whole issue took me by surprise. In our shop we have three teams of developers and all the development datbases are in a single sql instance. One of the group leaders asked me if there is any way to prevent those not in his group from even seeing the database display name under SSMS and sql tools (e.g. query editor, via OLEDB). I don't know the reason for his concern -- developers outside his group are not authorized to even view his databases but from a security perspective it seems reasonable: If a user does not have access to a databse, why should the database even "exist" for that user. This applies regardless of the form of Windows authentication used.

TIA,

Barkingdog

|||

Thanks, this isn't a scenario we'd been discussing so I'm glad you brought this up. I'm sorry we don't have a solution for you now, but hopefully in the future we can do something to enable this.

Thanks,
Jack Richins
SDE SQL Server

|||Although it blocks users from seeing other databases in the SMSS database dropdown, as the user I can still query sys.databases and see everything and I have used the deny view any database to public. In a hosting environment, this just won't be acceptable. In sql 2000, I just created a sysdatabases view that looked at your credentials and passed what you had rights to. Can't do that in 2005, but definately need this.|||

The main issue here is that determining what databases a user can see is an expensive check, as the permissions to access the database are stored in the database itself, so verifying them requires a database access. This prevents a general solution from being available through SSMS - some customers manage hundreds of databases on a single server, which would make such checks prohibitive.

You can still write a view in SQL Server 2005 that could filter rows using "has_dbaccess() = 1" as a predicate, but you should only do this if you have a limited number of databases, as it would be too expensive otherwise.

I also want to add that we're aware of this request and we're looking at ways to address it.

Thanks
Laurentiu

Hide an ODBC connection?

We've purchased a 3rd party app that uses an Access db linked to SQL Server. Unfortunately, we've come to discover that a user of ours seems to know access and has decided to take report writing into their own hands.
We have the app and the access db on a server and a mapped a drive for each user.

Unfortunately, I can't lock down the ODBC connection because that would lock it down in the app. Someone suggested using a File DSN and removing the System DSN's off all users machines. I'm not too familiar with File DSN's and wanted to know if this would prevent users from creating their own Access mdb's linked to my server or not.

Any idea's are greatly appreciated.Dude,

Bad news :( - unless you can stop the end user from hacking the registry and prevent access to the odbcad32 (which you really can't lock out and have the machine access the server) there isn't much you can do AFAIK.

You didn't mention what OS's are in play. If you are a Win2k/WinXP shop you may be able to build a policy that limits the user from adding a new DSN, but I doubt even a file DSN will really stop him. If you go look in C:\Program Files\Common Files\ODBC\Data Sources All they really do is point to the system DSN. And he'll be able to pick it in Access.|||I figured the answer would go something like that.
Thank you anyways.

Hide a sub report from view

Is there any way to make a subreport hidden on the report server. For
instance report "A" contains subreport "B". I want the user to be able to
run report "A" that runs report "B", but I only want them to be able to see
report "A" in the report server folder.
Thanks,
--
JasonOn Mar 19, 7:38 am, JasonDWilson
<JasonDWil...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> Is there any way to make a subreport hidden on the report server. For
> instance report "A" contains subreport "B". I want the user to be able to
> run report "A" that runs report "B", but I only want them to be able to see
> report "A" in the report server folder.
> Thanks,
> --
> Jason
You can try not letting the users have access to subreport B (via the
Report Manager permissions) and see if they can still access subreport
B via report A. If this does not work, then you will need to create
something custom that passes the User ID and another item/parameter to
the subreport to let it know that it is being called from report A:
The expression =User!UserID.ToString will get the current user and
then you would need to pass maybe a hidden parameter to subreport B
from report A (one that is not intuitive). That way, when subreport B
is called on it's own, the user will not know the parameter value it
needs. Hope this helps.
Regards,
Enrique Martinez
Sr. SQL Server Developer

Hidden User?

Did a remote backup of a database used to run a live website.
Restored the database to my local MSDE installation.
Now cannot access the local database using the user login FRED, which is the
same as the website, as I use it for local testing. Get error message:
cannot open user default database login failed.
Cannot see FRED the user anywhere, yet if I look under Roles, FRED is listed
as a db_owner.
If try and add FRED, get error saying User or Role already exists on this
database.
How can I reactivate FRED on my local server?
hi Kevin,
"Kevin" <kevgrim@.tesco.net> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:%23BNg60wdEHA.2520@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Did a remote backup of a database used to run a live website.
> Restored the database to my local MSDE installation.
> Now cannot access the local database using the user login FRED, which is
the
> same as the website, as I use it for local testing. Get error message:
> cannot open user default database login failed.
> Cannot see FRED the user anywhere, yet if I look under Roles, FRED is
listed
> as a db_owner.
> If try and add FRED, get error saying User or Role already exists on this
> database.
> How can I reactivate FRED on my local server?
>
this problem is known as "orphaned users"... you can have a look at a
perfect article by Neil Boyl abot the matter at
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/colu...okenlogins.asp
the system stored procedure sp_chang_users_logins use is explained for
solving your trouble
Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
http://www.asql.biz/DbaMgr.shtmhttp://italy.mvps.org
DbaMgr2k ver 0.8.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.54.0
(my vb6+sql-dmo little try to provide MS MSDE 1.0 and MSDE 2000 a visual
interface)
-- remove DMO to reply

Hidden Parrameters

Hi,
I want to send to my Report hidden parameters by Url.
I read that in order to do so I need to check the Prompt User checkbox
and clear the Prompt string.
But I can't find the Prompt User checkbox in the Report Parameters window.
I installed SP1, but still I can't find this checkbox.
Where is it?
Thanks,
LimorHi Limor,
You can define a parameter as a hidden parameter on the Report Server where
you deploy it.
Unfortunately this is a minus point for RS since the hidden parameters are
first introduced with Service Pack 1
You just go to the Report Properties Tab on the Report Server for that report.
Select Parameters from the left menu.
When you click it then the list of parameters will be displayed. You will
see the "Prompt User" checkbox there.
Eralper
http://www.kodyaz.com
"Limor Bellison" wrote:
> Hi,
> I want to send to my Report hidden parameters by Url.
> I read that in order to do so I need to check the Prompt User checkbox
> and clear the Prompt string.
> But I can't find the Prompt User checkbox in the Report Parameters window.
> I installed SP1, but still I can't find this checkbox.
> Where is it?
> Thanks,
> Limor
>|||Hi eralper,
Thanx for your fast response.
I did exactly what you told me and get into the Parameters window,
but there is no "Prompt User" checkbox.
Do you want me to send you a print screen of this window to your email?
Limor
"eralper" wrote:
> Hi Limor,
> You can define a parameter as a hidden parameter on the Report Server where
> you deploy it.
> Unfortunately this is a minus point for RS since the hidden parameters are
> first introduced with Service Pack 1
> You just go to the Report Properties Tab on the Report Server for that report.
> Select Parameters from the left menu.
> When you click it then the list of parameters will be displayed. You will
> see the "Prompt User" checkbox there.
> Eralper
> http://www.kodyaz.com
>
> "Limor Bellison" wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I want to send to my Report hidden parameters by Url.
> > I read that in order to do so I need to check the Prompt User checkbox
> > and clear the Prompt string.
> > But I can't find the Prompt User checkbox in the Report Parameters window.
> > I installed SP1, but still I can't find this checkbox.
> > Where is it?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Limor
> >|||Hi Limor,
I added a post at http://www.kodyaz.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=291 about this
subject and attached two images. One for the settings and the other is for
sending the hidden parameter by url
"Limor Bellison" wrote:
> Hi eralper,
> Thanx for your fast response.
> I did exactly what you told me and get into the Parameters window,
> but there is no "Prompt User" checkbox.
> Do you want me to send you a print screen of this window to your email?
> Limor
>
> "eralper" wrote:
> > Hi Limor,
> >
> > You can define a parameter as a hidden parameter on the Report Server where
> > you deploy it.
> >
> > Unfortunately this is a minus point for RS since the hidden parameters are
> > first introduced with Service Pack 1
> >
> > You just go to the Report Properties Tab on the Report Server for that report.
> > Select Parameters from the left menu.
> > When you click it then the list of parameters will be displayed. You will
> > see the "Prompt User" checkbox there.
> >
> > Eralper
> > http://www.kodyaz.com
> >
> >
> >
> > "Limor Bellison" wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > > I want to send to my Report hidden parameters by Url.
> > > I read that in order to do so I need to check the Prompt User checkbox
> > > and clear the Prompt string.
> > > But I can't find the Prompt User checkbox in the Report Parameters window.
> > > I installed SP1, but still I can't find this checkbox.
> > > Where is it?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Limor
> > >|||Thank you, this is exactly what I needed.
My mistake was that I was trying to do it from the visual studio instead of
the Report Manager. Now it's working.
Thanx,
Limor
"eralper" wrote:
> Hi Limor,
> I added a post at http://www.kodyaz.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=291 about this
> subject and attached two images. One for the settings and the other is for
> sending the hidden parameter by url
>
> "Limor Bellison" wrote:
> > Hi eralper,
> > Thanx for your fast response.
> > I did exactly what you told me and get into the Parameters window,
> > but there is no "Prompt User" checkbox.
> > Do you want me to send you a print screen of this window to your email?
> >
> > Limor
> >
> >
> > "eralper" wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Limor,
> > >
> > > You can define a parameter as a hidden parameter on the Report Server where
> > > you deploy it.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately this is a minus point for RS since the hidden parameters are
> > > first introduced with Service Pack 1
> > >
> > > You just go to the Report Properties Tab on the Report Server for that report.
> > > Select Parameters from the left menu.
> > > When you click it then the list of parameters will be displayed. You will
> > > see the "Prompt User" checkbox there.
> > >
> > > Eralper
> > > http://www.kodyaz.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Limor Bellison" wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > > I want to send to my Report hidden parameters by Url.
> > > > I read that in order to do so I need to check the Prompt User checkbox
> > > > and clear the Prompt string.
> > > > But I can't find the Prompt User checkbox in the Report Parameters window.
> > > > I installed SP1, but still I can't find this checkbox.
> > > > Where is it?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Limor
> > > >

Hidden Parameters

Is there any way to have a parameter hidden for a report without it being Read-Only? I want the user to be able to select a specific parameter within a report and have another parameter passed via URL.

I suppose this question is for RS 2005: in report designer just mark the report parameter as "Hidden" and make sure that the "Internal" checkbox is not set. This will result in a parameter that is hidden but can still be set e.g. through a value passed via URL.

If the report was already published to a report server, delete it first from the report server and then republish again to make sure that the parameter information is not merged with the settings of the previously published old version of the report.

-- Robert

Hidden Ignored Words?

We are getting the dreaded "A clause of the query contained only
ignored words." error when a user searches for the following term:
"3.0" (without quotes).
I've checked all the noise word lists and "3.0" is not in there. "3" is
however.
Also, when one searches for "3.1" it's fine - no error.
When one searches for "3.00" it's also fine.
How can one explain this and which other "hidden" noise words should we
add to our noise word filter (in the search form)?
remove the 3 and the 0 from your noise word lists. You will need to rebuild
the catalogs!
Hilary Cotter
Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
positions, strategies or opinions.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Jack" <cawoodm@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140526298.751202.15490@.f14g2000cwb.googlegro ups.com...
> We are getting the dreaded "A clause of the query contained only
> ignored words." error when a user searches for the following term:
> "3.0" (without quotes).
> I've checked all the noise word lists and "3.0" is not in there. "3" is
> however.
> Also, when one searches for "3.1" it's fine - no error.
> When one searches for "3.00" it's also fine.
> How can one explain this and which other "hidden" noise words should we
> add to our noise word filter (in the search form)?
>
|||Aha! It's because of the "." being a word-breaker - is that correct?
Shall I remove it from the noise_eng file? or the enu...
I also noticed that a standalone "#" was being treated as a noise word
and throwing that ugly error. Can you explain that one?
Many thanks
|||Yes . is a word or token boundary (actually there are some rules about
this). # is not a noise word when prefaced by a c, j or f.
Hilary Cotter
Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
positions, strategies or opinions.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Jack" <cawoodm@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140543145.061487.313930@.f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
> Aha! It's because of the "." being a word-breaker - is that correct?
> Shall I remove it from the noise_eng file? or the enu...
> I also noticed that a standalone "#" was being treated as a noise word
> and throwing that ugly error. Can you explain that one?
> Many thanks
>
|||I actually need to understand where I could see a complete list of
noise words. # is not in the noise word list. Is it a token boundary?
Where is the complete list of these?
Currently we are fighting fires as these errors occur.
|||The noise words are in the noise word lists. Some characters have special
significance - for example C#, and C++.
Hilary Cotter
Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
positions, strategies or opinions.
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Jack" <cawoodm@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140593482.893539.110220@.o13g2000cwo.googlegr oups.com...
>I actually need to understand where I could see a complete list of
> noise words. # is not in the noise word list. Is it a token boundary?
> Where is the complete list of these?
> Currently we are fighting fires as these errors occur.
>

Hidden columns/blank PDF page(s)

I have been trying for some time to create a columnar report where certain columns can be hidden as requested by the user. I have tried placing the complete column set in the report, and then hiding a subset of columns, but blank pages are produced when rendered to PDF since the report body does not appear to shrink as columns are hidden and justify themselves to the left. I have tried a table, list, and matrix to no avail...

Does anyone know of a workaround, a trick, or even a hack that may accomplish what I am after?

Thanks.

Oh well, guess there is no way to do it. I have seen many other posts of people trying to do the same thing. I wish someone from Microsoft would just say it's impossible so I could forget about trying to come up with a workaround... Doesn't seem like the functionality I am after is asking too much. Actually, I pretty much consider the PDF rendering the blank space to extra pages to be a rendering bug... Seems the renderer could be capable of clipping blank space... My 0.02 rant.|||I'm having the same issue so if anyone, especially someone from MSFT, has any ideas I'd be very eager to hear them.|||

Hello Iago,

I have found a work around for this problem. It’s a bit hacky, but does work.

1.Collapse all table columns to the smallest they can go so width = .125

2.Resize the DESIGN gird to the smallest it can go

3.Set the CanGrow property = FALSE for each cell that has text.This will suppress the vertical size of the text to the row height that you have specified

4.Create a new report in the same project.

5.Create a dummy dataset in the sub report.I usually use: SELECT NULL

6.Pull a table onto the grid and delete all but one cell

7. Set the cell = “”

8.Set the column width to the column width you had in the original report say .625

9.Return to your original report and create an additional header on the report

10. Drag a sub report into each column of the new header cell and set it equal to the new report

11. Run the report.Hidden columns now only take up the .125 space.