At work, we have production databases on which developers have read permission. When developers have to fix something in the database, they must test their scripts in a copy of the production databases and then ask the DBA team to execute it in production.
Sometimes however, the data that must be fixed is not in the test databases. Developers then ask for a new copy of production databases, and this can take a lot of time.
Of course, we could grant them update permission and ask them to use BEGIN TRANSACTION / ROLLBACK, but it is too risky. Nobody wants that, not even the developers.
My question: is it possible to create a profile on SQL Server - or grant special permission - that would allow to execute update and delete commands but would always, no matter what the developer wrote, rollback after a GO or after the last command issued in a session?
This would be really helpful to test scripts before sending them to production.
You could create a sproc and give EXEC access to devs on that sproc only, SOLUTION #1 - SPROCS. This is probably the most elegant solution as you want them to have a simple way to run their query and also want to control their perms on the production environment. Example to execute a command would be: EXEC [dbo].[usp_rollback_query] 'master', 'INSERT INTO table1 SELECT * FROM table2
SOLUTION #1
USE [DATABASENAME]
GO
ALTER PROC dbo.usp_rollback_query
(
#db VARCHAR(128),
#query NVARCHAR(max)
)
AS
BEGIN
DECLARE #main_query NVARCHAR(max) = 'USE [' + #db + ']
' + #query;
BEGIN TRAN
EXEC sp_executesql #main_query;
ROLLBACK TRAN
END
If you can afford to have snapshot created and dropped each time, SOLUTION #2 - DB SNAPSHOTS is the best way to go about it. It's super fast, the only two drawbacks are that you need to kick people off the DB before you can restore and it will restore all changes made since the snapshot was created.
SOLUTION #2
-- CREATE SNAPSHOT
CREATE DATABASE [DATABASENAME_SS1]
ON
(
NAME = DATABASENAME,
FILENAME = 'your\path\DATABASENAME_SS1.ss'
) AS SNAPSHOT OF [DATABASENAME];
GO
-- let devs run whatever they want
-- CLOSE CONNECTIONS
USE [master];
GO
ALTER DATABASE [DATABASENAME]
SET SINGLE_USER
WITH ROLLBACK IMMEDIATE;
GO
-- RETORE DB
RESTORE DATABASE [DATABASENAME]
FROM DATABASE_SNAPSHOT = 'DATABASENAME_SS1';
GO
-- CLEANUP SNAPSHOT COPY
DROP DATABASE [DATABASENAME_SS1];
I don't think ROLLBACK on each query is a good idea or a good design but if you have to go that route, you would need to use triggers. The limitation with triggers is that a DATABASE or SERVER level trigger can only be for DDL and not DML. Creating triggers on each TABLE object that you think is being altered is doable, however, the drawback here is that you need to know which tables are being modified and even then it's quite messy. Regardless please look at SOLUTION #3 - TABLE TRIGGERS below. To make this better you could create a role and check if the user is part of that role, then rollback.
SOLUTION #3
USE DATABASENAME
GO
ALTER TRIGGER dbo.tr_rollback_devs
ON dbo.table_name
AFTER INSERT, DELETE, UPDATE
AS
BEGIN
SET NOCOUNT ON;
IF SYSTEM_USER IN ('dev1', 'dev2')
ROLLBACK
END
GO
I've got a database that is replicated on two servers, a live server and a test server, so that whenever it's needed the 'test' database gets overwritten by the 'live' database (so that I can reset everything if I've made a mess.)
I want an Stored Procedure in the 'test' database, that will only run in the 'test' database, but to do this I need to have it in the 'live' database as well, so that it can be copied over when 'test' is overwritten.
The procedure starts:
if ##SERVERNAME<>'TEST'
begin
raiserror ('NOT ON TEST! This SP must only be run on TEST.',16,1)
return
end
So that if it runs in live, it immediately exits.
Unfortunately the "Live" database server uses an older version of SQL, and doesn't seem to understand the lead/lag/over statements in the script, and refuses to create the procedure because of these "Incorrect syntax" errors.
The SP definitely works in the test server.
Is there a way to disregard the error messages when creating a stored procedure?
I've found a prior question that explained how to make a stored procedure with the same name, but I need the stored procedure to contain the script that the server thinks is incorrect.
The only way to not get the stored-procedure validated when created, is to run a dynamic-sql query within.
Example:
CREATE PROCEDURE dbo.YourStoredProcedure AS
BEGIN
IF ##SERVERNAME<>'TEST'
BEGIN
RAISERROR ('NOT ON TEST! This SP must only be run on TEST.',16,1)
RETURN
END
DECLARE #SQL NVARCHAR = N'
SELECT rowOne
, rowTwo
, valueOne
, LEAD(valueOne) OVER (PARTITION BY rowOne ORDER BY rowTwo DESC) AS preValue
FROM dbo.YourTable
'
EXEC(#SQL)
END
Notes:
On the long term, try to find a better strategy than DB replication for different systems. Check Continuous Deployment
Make sure to check concatenated dynamic-sql for potential issues (sql injection). Check QUOTENAME()
I have a migration script with the following statement:
ALTER TABLE [Tasks] ALTER COLUMN [SortOrder] int NOT NULL
What will happen if I run that twice? Will it change anything the second time? MS SQL Management Studio just reports "Command(s) completed successfully", but with no details on whether they actually did anything.
If it's not already idempotent, how do I make it so?
I would say that second time, SQL Server checks metadata and do nothing because nothing has changed.
But if you don't like possibility of multiple execution you can add simple condition to your script:
CREATE TABLE Tasks(SortOrder VARCHAR(100));
IF NOT EXISTS (SELECT 1
FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.COLUMNS
WHERE [TABLE_NAME] = 'Tasks'
AND [COLUMN_NAME] = 'SortOrder'
AND IS_NULLABLE = 'NO'
AND DATA_TYPE = 'INT')
BEGIN
ALTER TABLE [Tasks] ALTER COLUMN [SortOrder] INT NOT NULL
END
SqlFiddleDemo
When you execute it the second time, the query gets executed but since the table is already altered, there is no effect. So it makes no effect on the table.
No change is there when the script executes twice.
Here is a good MSDN read about: Inside ALTER TABLE
Let's look at what SQL Server does internally when performing an ALTER
TABLE command. SQL Server can carry out an ALTER TABLE command in any
of three ways:
SQL Server might need to change only metadata.
SQL Server might need to examine all the existing data to make sure
it's compatible with the change but then change only metadata.
SQL Server might need to physically change every row.
I have a remote stored procedure that i am running:
EXECUTE Contoso.Frob.dbo.Grobber #StartDate='20140513', #EndDate='20140518'
and this remote stored procedure returns a rowset:
EmployeeID EmployeeName StartDateTime EndDateTime
---------- -------------- ------------- -----------------------
619 Guyer, Kirsten 2014-05-13 19:00:00.000 2014-05-13 19:00:00.000
...
Excellent. Perfect. Good. Sweet.
Now that i have these results, i need to store them in a table. Any kind of table. I don't care what kind of table:
physical table
temporary table
global temporary table
table variable
I just need them stored so that i can process them. The problem is that when i try to insert the results into a table, whether it be:
a physical table
INSERT INTO EmployeeSchedule
EXECUTE Contoso.Frob.dbo.Grobber #StartDate='20140513', #EndDate='20140518'
temporary table
INSERT INTO #EmployeeSchedule
EXECUTE Contoso.Frob.dbo.Grobber #StartDate='20140513', #EndDate='20140518'
a global temporary table
INSERT INTO ##EmployeeSchedule
EXECUTE Contoso.Frob.dbo.Grobber #StartDate='20140513', #EndDate='20140518'
a table variable
INSERT INTO #EmployeeSchedule
EXECUTE Contoso.Frob.dbo.Grobber #StartDate='20140513', #EndDate='20140518'
SQL Server insists (nay, demands) that it begin a distributed transaction:
OLE DB provider "SQLNCLI10" for linked server "Contoso" returned message "The partner transaction manager has disabled its support for remote/network transactions.".
Msg 7391, Level 16, State 2, Line 41
The operation could not be performed because OLE DB provider "SQLNCLI10" for linked server "Contoso" was unable to begin a distributed transaction.
Why not just...
Now, making changes to the Contoso server is not an option. Why? Doesn't matter. Pretend that Jack Bauer will make an appearance and Guantanamo anyone who tries to modify Contoso. This means i cannot enable or reconfigure MSDTC on \\Contoso.
Did you try using READ UNCOMMITTED?
Yes.
SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL READ UNCOMMITTED
INSERT INTO #EmployeeSchedule
EXECUTE wclnightdb.NGDemo.dbo.tbtGetSchedule #StartDate, #EndDate
The partner transaction manager has disabled its support for remote/network transactions.
And:
INSERT INTO #EmployeeSchedule
WITH (NOLOCK)
EXECUTE wclnightdb.NGDemo.dbo.tbtGetSchedule #StartDate, #EndDate
Sorry. No nolock. Nolock is a no no:
Msg 1065, Level 15, State 1, Line 15
The NOLOCK and READUNCOMMITTED lock hints are not allowed for target tables of INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE or MERGE statements.
I always could give up on SQL Server
If i were doing this in a programming environment, it would be fairly easy to fix:
using (IDataReader rdr = ADOHelper.Execute(conn, "EXECUTE Contoso.Frob.dbo.Grobber #StartDate='20140513', #EndDate='20140518'")
{
while (rdr.Read())
{
InsertRowIntoTable(conn, rdr);
}
}
Although that would require me to create a binary, ship it, and schedule it. I'm looking for the option that works with SQL Server (so SQL Agent can schedule the job).
Bonus Reading
SET REMOTE_PROC_TRANSACTIONS (Transact-SQL)
How do I use the results of a stored procedure from within another?
How can one iterate over stored procedure results from within another stored procedure....without cursors?
SQL Server insists (nay, demands) that it begin a distributed
transaction:
If you can't configure your servers to use distributed transactions for whatever reason, you can tell it not to.
USE [master]
GO
EXEC master.dbo.sp_serveroption
#server = N'Contoso',
#optname = N'remote proc transaction promotion',
#optvalue = N'false'
GO
Or in SSMS GUI:
I don't know all implications of turning off this option, but at least now my INSERT ... EXEC [LinkedServer]... works.
Two options to try would be:
Since you already have a Linked Server set up, use it with OPENQUERY, as in:
SELECT column1, column2 FROM OPENQUERY(Contoso, 'EXECUTE Frob.dbo.Grobber #StartDate=''20140513'', #EndDate=''20140518''')
If the returned columns will remain consistent, create a SQLCLR Table-Valued Function. This assumes that the remote proc is Read-Only (i.e. SELECT-only). But unlike T-SQL functions, SQLCLR functions can execute Stored Procedures using the connection string "Context Connection = True;" as long as the Stored Procedure is SELECT-only (i.e. does not change the state of the DB through DML, DDL, etc).
How about this:
-- Either create a job that runs your remote sql via a SQLSMD command, or just run something like this:
EXEC master..xp_cmdshell 'SQLCMD -S Server\SQLSERVERDEV2005 -i"c:\DML.sql"'
(It might be easier with a job because you can modify the job step easily via sp_update_jobstep to get the right values in for your parameters)
-- Output the result of the sqlcmd into a file
-- Load the file into a table via bulk import.
I have three stored procedures Sp1, Sp2 and Sp3.
The first one (Sp1) will execute the second one (Sp2) and save returned data into #tempTB1 and the second one will execute the third one (Sp3) and save data into #tempTB2.
If I execute the Sp2 it will work and it will return me all my data from the Sp3, but the problem is in the Sp1, when I execute it it will display this error:
INSERT EXEC statement cannot be nested
I tried to change the place of execute Sp2 and it display me another error:
Cannot use the ROLLBACK statement
within an INSERT-EXEC statement.
This is a common issue when attempting to 'bubble' up data from a chain of stored procedures. A restriction in SQL Server is you can only have one INSERT-EXEC active at a time. I recommend looking at How to Share Data Between Stored Procedures which is a very thorough article on patterns to work around this type of problem.
For example a work around could be to turn Sp3 into a Table-valued function.
This is the only "simple" way to do this in SQL Server without some giant convoluted created function or executed sql string call, both of which are terrible solutions:
create a temp table
openrowset your stored procedure data into it
EXAMPLE:
INSERT INTO #YOUR_TEMP_TABLE
SELECT * FROM OPENROWSET ('SQLOLEDB','Server=(local);TRUSTED_CONNECTION=YES;','set fmtonly off EXEC [ServerName].dbo.[StoredProcedureName] 1,2,3')
Note: You MUST use 'set fmtonly off', AND you CANNOT add dynamic sql to this either inside the openrowset call, either for the string containing your stored procedure parameters or for the table name. Thats why you have to use a temp table rather than table variables, which would have been better, as it out performs temp table in most cases.
OK, encouraged by jimhark here is an example of the old single hash table approach: -
CREATE PROCEDURE SP3 as
BEGIN
SELECT 1, 'Data1'
UNION ALL
SELECT 2, 'Data2'
END
go
CREATE PROCEDURE SP2 as
BEGIN
if exists (select * from tempdb.dbo.sysobjects o where o.xtype in ('U') and o.id = object_id(N'tempdb..#tmp1'))
INSERT INTO #tmp1
EXEC SP3
else
EXEC SP3
END
go
CREATE PROCEDURE SP1 as
BEGIN
EXEC SP2
END
GO
/*
--I want some data back from SP3
-- Just run the SP1
EXEC SP1
*/
/*
--I want some data back from SP3 into a table to do something useful
--Try run this - get an error - can't nest Execs
if exists (select * from tempdb.dbo.sysobjects o where o.xtype in ('U') and o.id = object_id(N'tempdb..#tmp1'))
DROP TABLE #tmp1
CREATE TABLE #tmp1 (ID INT, Data VARCHAR(20))
INSERT INTO #tmp1
EXEC SP1
*/
/*
--I want some data back from SP3 into a table to do something useful
--However, if we run this single hash temp table it is in scope anyway so
--no need for the exec insert
if exists (select * from tempdb.dbo.sysobjects o where o.xtype in ('U') and o.id = object_id(N'tempdb..#tmp1'))
DROP TABLE #tmp1
CREATE TABLE #tmp1 (ID INT, Data VARCHAR(20))
EXEC SP1
SELECT * FROM #tmp1
*/
My work around for this problem has always been to use the principle that single hash temp tables are in scope to any called procs. So, I have an option switch in the proc parameters (default set to off). If this is switched on, the called proc will insert the results into the temp table created in the calling proc. I think in the past I have taken it a step further and put some code in the called proc to check if the single hash table exists in scope, if it does then insert the code, otherwise return the result set. Seems to work well - best way of passing large data sets between procs.
This trick works for me.
You don't have this problem on remote server, because on remote server, the last insert command waits for the result of previous command to execute. It's not the case on same server.
Profit that situation for a workaround.
If you have the right permission to create a Linked Server, do it.
Create the same server as linked server.
in SSMS, log into your server
go to "Server Object
Right Click on "Linked Servers", then "New Linked Server"
on the dialog, give any name of your linked server : eg: THISSERVER
server type is "Other data source"
Provider : Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL server
Data source: your IP, it can be also just a dot (.), because it's localhost
Go to the tab "Security" and choose the 3rd one "Be made using the login's current security context"
You can edit the server options (3rd tab) if you want
Press OK, your linked server is created
now your Sql command in the SP1 is
insert into #myTempTable
exec THISSERVER.MY_DATABASE_NAME.MY_SCHEMA.SP2
Believe me, it works even you have dynamic insert in SP2
I found a work around is to convert one of the prods into a table valued function. I realize that is not always possible, and introduces its own limitations. However, I have been able to always find at least one of the procedures a good candidate for this. I like this solution, because it doesn't introduce any "hacks" to the solution.
I encountered this issue when trying to import the results of a Stored Proc into a temp table, and that Stored Proc inserted into a temp table as part of its own operation. The issue being that SQL Server does not allow the same process to write to two different temp tables at the same time.
The accepted OPENROWSET answer works fine, but I needed to avoid using any Dynamic SQL or an external OLE provider in my process, so I went a different route.
One easy workaround I found was to change the temporary table in my stored procedure to a table variable. It works exactly the same as it did with a temp table, but no longer conflicts with my other temp table insert.
Just to head off the comment I know that a few of you are about to write, warning me off Table Variables as performance killers... All I can say to you is that in 2020 it pays dividends not to be afraid of Table Variables. If this was 2008 and my Database was hosted on a server with 16GB RAM and running off 5400RPM HDDs, I might agree with you. But it's 2020 and I have an SSD array as my primary storage and hundreds of gigs of RAM. I could load my entire company's database to a table variable and still have plenty of RAM to spare.
Table Variables are back on the menu!
I recommend to read this entire article. Below is the most relevant section of that article that addresses your question:
Rollback and Error Handling is Difficult
In my articles on Error and Transaction Handling in SQL Server, I suggest that you should always have an error handler like
BEGIN CATCH
IF ##trancount > 0 ROLLBACK TRANSACTION
EXEC error_handler_sp
RETURN 55555
END CATCH
The idea is that even if you do not start a transaction in the procedure, you should always include a ROLLBACK, because if you were not able to fulfil your contract, the transaction is not valid.
Unfortunately, this does not work well with INSERT-EXEC. If the called procedure executes a ROLLBACK statement, this happens:
Msg 3915, Level 16, State 0, Procedure SalesByStore, Line 9 Cannot use the ROLLBACK statement within an INSERT-EXEC statement.
The execution of the stored procedure is aborted. If there is no CATCH handler anywhere, the entire batch is aborted, and the transaction is rolled back. If the INSERT-EXEC is inside TRY-CATCH, that CATCH handler will fire, but the transaction is doomed, that is, you must roll it back. The net effect is that the rollback is achieved as requested, but the original error message that triggered the rollback is lost. That may seem like a small thing, but it makes troubleshooting much more difficult, because when you see this error, all you know is that something went wrong, but you don't know what.
I had the same issue and concern over duplicate code in two or more sprocs. I ended up adding an additional attribute for "mode". This allowed common code to exist inside one sproc and the mode directed flow and result set of the sproc.
what about just store the output to the static table ? Like
-- SubProcedure: subProcedureName
---------------------------------
-- Save the value
DELETE lastValue_subProcedureName
INSERT INTO lastValue_subProcedureName (Value)
SELECT #Value
-- Return the value
SELECT #Value
-- Procedure
--------------------------------------------
-- get last value of subProcedureName
SELECT Value FROM lastValue_subProcedureName
its not ideal, but its so simple and you don't need to rewrite everything.
UPDATE:
the previous solution does not work well with parallel queries (async and multiuser accessing) therefore now Iam using temp tables
-- A local temporary table created in a stored procedure is dropped automatically when the stored procedure is finished.
-- The table can be referenced by any nested stored procedures executed by the stored procedure that created the table.
-- The table cannot be referenced by the process that called the stored procedure that created the table.
IF OBJECT_ID('tempdb..#lastValue_spGetData') IS NULL
CREATE TABLE #lastValue_spGetData (Value INT)
-- trigger stored procedure with special silent parameter
EXEC dbo.spGetData 1 --silent mode parameter
nested spGetData stored procedure content
-- Save the output if temporary table exists.
IF OBJECT_ID('tempdb..#lastValue_spGetData') IS NOT NULL
BEGIN
DELETE #lastValue_spGetData
INSERT INTO #lastValue_spGetData(Value)
SELECT Col1 FROM dbo.Table1
END
-- stored procedure return
IF #silentMode = 0
SELECT Col1 FROM dbo.Table1
Declare an output cursor variable to the inner sp :
#c CURSOR VARYING OUTPUT
Then declare a cursor c to the select you want to return.
Then open the cursor.
Then set the reference:
DECLARE c CURSOR LOCAL FAST_FORWARD READ_ONLY FOR
SELECT ...
OPEN c
SET #c = c
DO NOT close or reallocate.
Now call the inner sp from the outer one supplying a cursor parameter like:
exec sp_abc a,b,c,, #cOUT OUTPUT
Once the inner sp executes, your #cOUT is ready to fetch. Loop and then close and deallocate.
If you are able to use other associated technologies such as C#, I suggest using the built in SQL command with Transaction parameter.
var sqlCommand = new SqlCommand(commandText, null, transaction);
I've created a simple Console App that demonstrates this ability which can be found here:
https://github.com/hecked12/SQL-Transaction-Using-C-Sharp
In short, C# allows you to overcome this limitation where you can inspect the output of each stored procedure and use that output however you like, for example you can feed it to another stored procedure. If the output is ok, you can commit the transaction, otherwise, you can revert the changes using rollback.
On SQL Server 2008 R2, I had a mismatch in table columns that caused the Rollback error. It went away when I fixed my sqlcmd table variable populated by the insert-exec statement to match that returned by the stored proc. It was missing org_code. In a windows cmd file, it loads result of stored procedure and selects it.
set SQLTXT= declare #resets as table (org_id nvarchar(9), org_code char(4), ^
tin(char9), old_strt_dt char(10), strt_dt char(10)); ^
insert #resets exec rsp_reset; ^
select * from #resets;
sqlcmd -U user -P pass -d database -S server -Q "%SQLTXT%" -o "OrgReport.txt"