I have a table in SQL Server 2008 (MyTable) which contains a field (MyField). MyField cannot take nulls and it will be populated with a default value. The default value is calculated by means of a complex stored procedure (MyStoreProcedure), which invokes other tables and fields in my database. My users should have the option to change this default value once it has been supplied by SQL server. SQL server, however, will have a AFTER UPDATE TRIGGER to check that the entered value in MyField conforms to certain rules.
I have tried to populate MyField with the intended default value by means of a 'TRIGGER AFTER INSERT' and SQL Server tells me that null values cannot be inserted into MyField, which is actually true. Is there a workaround to implement this default value based upon a stored proc?
Thanks
This may be a case for an INSTEAD OF INSERT trigger, which will allow you to access the stored procedure and set a default value before the row(s) is/are inserted into the target table.
The trick is then getting the stored procedure result(s) into the trigger. One approach would be to insert the stored procedure results into a temporary table, which then may be joined with the INSERTED meta table for the actual insert. See How to SELECT FROM stored procedure.
I'm trying to understand how to streamline the process of inserting a record if none exists or updating a record if it already exists. I'm not using stored procedures, although maybe that would be the most efficient way of doing this.
The actual scenario in which this is necessary is saving a user preference/setting to my SettingsUser table.
In MS Access I would typically pull a DAO recordset looking for the specified setting. If the recordset comes back empty then I know I need to add a new record which I can do with the same recordset object. On the other hand, if it isn't empty, I can just update the setting's value right away. In theory, this is only two database operations.
What is the recommended way of doing this in .NET?
A stored procedure is certainly an easy way to do that. There you can try to update the record, and if no record changes, you add it. Example:
create procedure UpateUserSetting
#UserId int,
#Setting int
as
set nocount on
update UserSetting
set Setting = #Setting
where UserId = #UserId
if (##rowcount = 0) begin
insert into UserSetting (
UserId, Setting
) values (
#UserId, #Setting
)
end
You can do the same without a stored procedure. Then you would first run the update, and check the number of affected rows, which you get returned from the ExecuteNonQuery method, and do the insert in another query if needed.
I have query in a stored procedure that calls some linked servers with some dynamic SQL. I understand that EF doesn't like that, so I specifically listed all the columns that would be returned. Yet, it still doesn't like that. What am I doing wrong here? I just want EF to be able to detect the columns returned from the stored procedure so I can create the classes I need.
Please see the following code that makes up the last lines of my stored procedure:
SELECT
#TempMain.ID,
#TempMain.Class_Data,
#TempMain.Web_Store_Class1,
#TempMain.Web_Store_Class2,
#TempMain.Web_Store_Status,
#TempMain.Cur_1pc_Cat51_Price,
#TempMain.Cur_1pc_Cat52_Price,
#TempMain.Cur_1pc_Cat61_Price,
#TempMain.Cur_1pc_Cat62_Price,
#TempMain.Cur_1pc_Cat63_Price,
#TempMain.Flat_Length,
#TempMain.Flat_Width,
#TempMain.Item_Height,
#TempMain.Item_Weight,
#TempMain.Um,
#TempMain.Lead_Time_Code,
#TempMain.Wp_Image_Nme,
#TempMain.Wp_Mod_Dte,
#TempMain.Catalog_Price_Chg_Dt,
#TempMain.Description,
#TempMain.Supersede_Ctl,
#TempMain.Supersede_Pn,
TempDesc.Cust_Desc,
TempMfgr.Mfgr_Item_Nbr,
TempMfgr.Mfgr_Name,
TempMfgr.Vendor_ID
FROM
#TempMain
LEFT JOIN TempDesc ON #TempMain.ID = TempDesc.ID
LEFT JOIN TempMfgr ON #TempMain.ID = TempMfgr.ID
EF doesn't support importing stored procedures which build result set from:
Dynamic queries
Temporary tables
The reason is that to import the procedure EF must execute it. Such operation can be dangerous because it can trigger some changes in the database. Because of that EF uses special SQL command before it executes the stored procedure:
SET FMTONLY ON
By executing this command stored procedure will return only "metadata" about columns in its result set and it will not execute its logic. But because the logic wasn't executed there is no temporary table (or built dynamic query) so metadata contains nothing.
You have two choices (except the one which requires re-writing your stored procedure to not use these features):
Define the returned complex type manually (I guess it should work)
Use a hack and just for adding the stored procedure put at its beginning SET FMTONLY OFF. This will allow rest of your SP's code to execute in normal way. Just make sure that your SP doesn't modify any data because these modifications will be executed during import! After successful import remove that hack.
Adding this Non-Logical block of code solved the problem. Even though it will never Hit
IF 1=0 BEGIN
SET FMTONLY OFF
END
Why does my typed dataset not like temporary tables?
http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/adodotnetdataset/thread/fe76d511-64a8-436d-9c16-6d09ecf436ea/
Or you can create a User-Defined Table Type and return that.
CREATE TYPE T1 AS TABLE
( ID bigint NOT NULL
,Field1 varchar(max) COLLATE Latin1_General_CI_AI NOT NULL
,Field2 bit NOT NULL
,Field3 varchar(500) NOT NULL
);
GO
Then in the procedure:
DECLARE #tempTable dbo.T1
INSERT #tempTable (ID, Field1, Field2, Field3)
SELECT .....
....
SELECT * FROM #tempTable
Now EF should be able to recognize the returned columns type.
As some others have noted, make sure the procedure actually runs. In particular, in my case, I was running the procedure happily without error in SQL Server Management Studio completely forgetting that I was logged in with admin rights. As soon as I tried running the procedure using my application's principal user I found there was a table in the query that that user did not have permission to access.
Interesting side note: Had the same problem which I first solved by using Table Variables, rather than Temp Tables (just for the import). That wasn't particularly intuitive to me, and threw me off when initially observing my two SProcs: one using Temp tables and one with Table Variables.
(SET FMTONLY OFF never worked for me, so I just changed my SProcs temporarily to get the column info, rather than bothering with the hack on the EF side just as an FYI.)
My best option was really just manually creating the complex type and mapping the function import to it. Worked great, and the only difference ended up being that an additional FactoryMethod to create the properties was included in the Designer.
What I would add is:
That the import also fails if the stored procedures has parameters and returns no result set for the default parameter values.
My stored procedure had 2 float parameters and would not return anything when both parameters are 0.
So in order to add this stored procedure to the entity model, I set the value of these parameters in the stored procedure so that it is guaranteed to return some rows, no matter what the parameters actually are.
Then after adding this stored procedure to the entity model I undid the changes.
both solutions :
1- Define the returned complex type manually (I guess it should work)
2- Use a hack and just for adding the stored procedure put at its beginning SET FMTONLY OFF.
not working with me in some procedure however it worked with other one!
my procedure ends with this line:
SELECT machineId, production [AProduction]
, (select production FROM #ShiftBFinalProd WHERE machineId = #ShiftAFinalProd.machineId) [BProduction]
, (select production FROM #ShiftCFinalProd WHERE machineId = #ShiftAFinalProd.machineId) [CProduction]
FROM #ShiftAFinalProd
ORDER BY machineId
Thanks
In addition to what #tmanthley said, be sure that your stored procedure actually works by running it first in SSMS. I had imported some stored procedures and forgot about a couple dependent scalar functions, which caused EF to determine that the procedure returned no columns. Seems like a mistake I should have caught earlier on, but EF doesn't give you an error message in that case.
Entity Framework will try to get the columns by executing your stored procedure, passing NULL for every argument.
Please make sure that the stored procedure will return something under all the circumstances. Note it may have been smarter for Entity Framework to execute the stored proc with default values for the arguments, as opposed to NULLs.
ER does the following to get the metadata of the table:
SET FMTONLY ON
This will break your stored procedure in various circumstances, in particular, if it uses a temporary table.
So to get a result as complex type; please try by adding
SET FMTONLY OFF;
This worked for me - hope it works for you too.
Referred from https://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/e7f598a2-6827-4b27-a09d-aefe733b48e6/entity-model-add-function-import-stored-procedure-returns-no-columns?forum=adodotnetentityframework
In my case adding SET NOCOUNT ON; at the top of the procedure fixed the problem. It's best practice anyway.
In my case SET FMTONLY OFF did not work. The method I followed is, I took backup of original stored procedure and replace with only column name like the below query.
Select Convert(max,'') as Id,Convert(max,'') as Name
After this change, create new function import, complex type in entity framework.
Once the function import and complex type is created, replace the above query with your original stored procedure.
SET FMTONLY OFF
worked for me for one of the procedure but failed for other procedure. Following steps helps me to resolve my problem
Within a stored procedure, I have created temporary table with the same column type and inserted all the data returned by dynamic query to temp table.
and selected the temp table data.
Create table #temp
(
-- columns with same types as dynamic query
)
EXEC sp_executeSQL #sql
insert into #temp
Select * from #temp
drop table #temp
Deleted existing complex type, import function and stored procedure instance for old stored procedure and updated entity model for current new procedure.
Edit the imported Function in entity modal for desired complex type, you will get all the column information there which is not getting for previous stored procedure.
once you have done with the type creation you can delete the temporary table from stored procedure and then refresh Entity Framework.
In Entity framework, while getting column information the sql executes the procedure with passing null values in parameter. So I handled null case differently by creating a temp table with all the required columns and returning all the columns with no value when null is passed to the procedure.
In my procedure there was dynamic query, something like
declare #category_id int
set #category_id = (SELECT CATEGORY_ID FROM CORE_USER where USER_ID = #USER_ID)
declare #tableName varchar(15)
declare #sql VARCHAR(max)
declare #USER_IDT varchar(100)
declare #SESSION_IDT varchar(10)
IF (#category_id = 3)
set #tableName = 'STUD_STUDENT'
else if(#category_id = 4)
set #tableName = 'STUD_GUARDIAN'
if isnull(#tableName,'')<>''
begin
set #sql = 'SELECT [USER_ID], [FIRST_NAME], SCHOOL_NAME, SOCIETY_NAME, SCHOOL_ID,
SESSION_ID, [START_DATE], [END_DATE]
from #tableName
....
EXECUTE (#sql)
END
ELSE
BEGIN
SELECT * from #UserPrfTemp
END
I was not getting the column information in
my case after using the set FMTONLY OFF trick.
This is temp table I created to get the blank data.
Now I am getting the column info
Create table #UserPrfTemp
(
[USER_ID] bigint,
[FIRST_NAME] nvarchar(60),
SCHOOL_NAME nvarchar(60),
SOCIETY_NAME nvarchar(200)
.....
}
I solved this problem creating a table variable and then returning from it.
DECLARE #VarTable TABLE (
NeededColumn1 VARCHAR(100),
NeededColumn2 INT,
NeededColumn3 VARCHAR(100)
)
...
--Fetch Data from Linked server here
...
INSERT INTO #VarTable (NeededColumn1,NeededColumn2,NeededColumn3)
SELECT Column1, Column2, Column3
FROM #TempTable
SELECT * FROM #VarTable.
In that manner, your the SP result will be bounded to the table variable, which EF has access to.
I discovered a method that should help most people out whatever's happening.
Pull up your favourite SQL client and run the proc that you're trying to update with every parameter = null. Visual Studio is literally trying to do this when SET FMTONLY ON. Run a trace. You'll see.
You'll probably get an error, or unexpected data out. Fix that and your issue is fixed.
In my case the function read in JSON and failed because the JSON string was empty.
I just put something like
IF(#FooJSON IS NULL)
BEGIN
SELECT 1 VAR1, 2 VAR2;
END
ELSE
--OTHER LOGIC
That's probably an ugly solution, but I inherited this mess and we don't go into Ravenholm.
Change #Temp tables with WITH SQL EXPRESSION
I simply want a stored procedure that calculates a unique id (that is separate from the identity column) and inserts it. If it fails it just calls itself to regenerate said id. I have been looking for an example, but cant find one, and am not sure how I should get the SP to call itself, and set the appropriate output parameter. I would also appreciate someone pointing out how to test this SP also.
Edit
What I have now come up with is the following (Note I already have an identity column, I need a secondary id column.
ALTER PROCEDURE [dbo].[DataInstance_Insert]
#DataContainerId int out,
#ModelEntityId int,
#ParentDataContainerId int,
#DataInstanceId int out
AS
BEGIN
-- SET NOCOUNT ON added to prevent extra result sets from
-- interfering with SELECT statements.
SET NOCOUNT ON;
WHILE (#DataContainerId is null)
EXEC DataContainer_Insert #ModelEntityId, #ParentDataContainerId, #DataContainerId output
INSERT INTO DataInstance (DataContainerId, ModelEntityId)
VALUES (#DataContainerId, #ModelEntityId)
SELECT #DataInstanceId = scope_identity()
END
ALTER PROCEDURE [dbo].[DataContainer_Insert]
#ModelEntityId int,
#ParentDataContainerId int,
#DataContainerId int out
AS
BEGIN
BEGIN TRY
SET NOCOUNT ON;
DECLARE #ReferenceId int
SELECT #ReferenceId = isnull(Max(ReferenceId)+1,1) from DataContainer Where ModelEntityId=#ModelEntityId
INSERT INTO DataContainer (ReferenceId, ModelEntityId, ParentDataContainerId)
VALUES (#ReferenceId, #ModelEntityId, #ParentDataContainerId)
SELECT #DataContainerId = scope_identity()
END TRY
BEGIN CATCH
END CATCH
END
In CATCH blocks you must check the XACT_STATE value. You may be in a doomed transaction (-1) and in that case you are forced to rollback. Or your transaction may had already had rolled back and you should not continue to work under the assumption of an existing transaction. For a template procedure that handles T-SQL exceptions, try/catch blcoks and transactions correctly, see Exception handling and nested transactions
Never, under any languages, do recursive calls in exception blocks. You don't check why you hit an exception, therefore you don't know if is OK to try again. What if the exception is 652, read-only filegroup? Or your database is at max size? You'll re-curse until you'll hit stackoverflow...
Code that reads a value, makes a decision based on that value, then writes something is always going to fail under concurrency unless properly protected. You need to wrap the SELECT and INSERT in a transaction and your SELECT must be under SERIALISABLE isolation level.
And finally, ignoring the blatantly wrong code in your post, here is how you call a stored procedure passing in OUTPUT arguments:
exec DataContainer_Insert #SomeData, #DataContainerId OUTPUT;
Better yet, why not make UserID an identity column instead of trying to re-implement an identity column manually?
BTW: I think you meant
VALUES (#DataContainerId + 1 , SomeData)
Why not use the:
NewId()
T SQL function? (assuming sql server 2005/2008)
that sp will never ever do a successful insert, you have an identity property on the DataContainer table but you are inserting the ID, in that case you will need to set identity_insert on but then scope_identity() won't work
A PK violation also might not be trapped so you might also need to check for XACT_STATE()
why are you messing around with max, use scope_identity() and be done with it
CREATE PROCEDURE [test].[proc]
#ConfiguredContentId int,
#NumberOfGames int
AS
BEGIN
SET NOCOUNT ON
RETURN
#WunNumbers TABLE (WinNumb int)
INSERT INTO #WunNumbers (WinNumb)
SELECT TOP (#NumberOfGames) WinningNumber
FROM [Game].[Game] g
JOIN [Game].[RouletteResult] AS rr ON g.[Id] = rr.[gameId]
WHERE g.[ConfiguredContentId] = #ConfiguredContentId
ORDER BY g.[Stoptime] DESC
SELECT WinNumb, COUNT (WinNumb) AS "Count"
FROM #WunNumbers wn
GROUP BY wn.[WinNumb]
END
GO
This stored procedure returns values from first select statement, but I would like to have values from second select statement to be returned. Table #WunNumbers is a temporary table.
Any ideas???
Take a look at this code,
CREATE PROCEDURE Test
AS
DECLARE #tab table (no int, name varchar(30))
insert #tab select eno,ename from emp
select * from #tab
RETURN
What version of SQL Server are you using? In SQL Server 2008 you can use Table Parameters and Table Types.
An alternative approach is to return a table variable from a user defined function but I am not a big fan of this method.
You can find an example here
A temp table can be created in the caller and then populated from the called SP.
create table #GetValuesOutputTable(
...
);
exec GetValues; -- populates #GetValuesOutputTable
select * from #GetValuesOutputTable;
Some advantages of this approach over the "insert exec" is that it can be nested and that it can be used as input or output.
Some disadvantages are that the "argument" is not public, the table creation exists within each caller, and that the name of the table could collide with other temp objects. It helps when the temp table name closely matches the SP name and follows some convention.
Taking it a bit farther, for output only temp tables, the insert-exec approach and the temp table approach can be supported simultaneously by the called SP. This doesn't help too much for chaining SP's because the table still need to be defined in the caller but can help to simplify testing from the cmd line or when calling externally.
-- The "called" SP
declare
#returnAsSelect bit = 0;
if object_id('tempdb..#GetValuesOutputTable') is null
begin
set #returnAsSelect = 1;
create table #GetValuesOutputTable(
...
);
end
-- populate the table
if #returnAsSelect = 1
select * from #GetValuesOutputTable;
YES YOU CAN.
In your stored procedure, you fill the table #tbRetour.
At the very end of your stored procedure, you write:
SELECT * FROM #tbRetour
To execute the stored procedure, you write:
USE [...]
GO
DECLARE #return_value int
EXEC #return_value = [dbo].[getEnregistrementWithDetails]
#id_enregistrement_entete = '(guid)'
GO
The return type of a procedure is int.
You can also return result sets (as your code currently does) (okay, you can also send messages, which are strings)
Those are the only "returns" you can make. Whilst you can add table-valued parameters to a procedure (see BOL), they're input only.
Edit:
(Or as another poster mentioned, you could also use a Table Valued Function, rather than a procedure)
First create a real, permanent table as a template that has the required layout for the returned temporary table, using a naming convention that identifies it as a template and links it symbolically to the SP, eg tmp_SPName_Output. This table will never contain any data.
In the SP, use INSERT to load data into a temp table following the same naming convention, e.g. #SPName_Output which is assumed to exist. You can test for its existence and return an error if it does not.
Before calling the sp use this simple select to create the temp table:
SELECT TOP(0) * INTO #SPName_Output FROM tmp_SPName_Output;
EXEC SPName;
-- Now process records in #SPName_Output;
This has these distinct advantages:
The temp table is local to the current session, unlike ##, so will not clash with concurrent calls to the SP from
different sessions. It is also dropped automatically when out of scope.
The template table is maintained alongside the SP, so if changes are
made to the output (new columns added, for example) then pre-existing
callers of the SP do not break. The caller does not need to be changed.
You can define any number of output tables with different naming for
one SP and fill them all. You can also define alternative outputs
with different naming and have the SP check the existence of the temp
tables to see which need to be filled.
Similarly, if major changes are made but you want to keep backwards
compatibility, you can have a new template table and naming for the later
version but still support the earlier version by checking which temp
table the caller has created.