I have the following stored procedure in Sybase 16,
create or replace procedure ... as
...
drop table tempdb..koppelingen
go
declare
vre_cursor cursor for
...
Then I see: declare cursor must be the only statement in a query batch.
If I skip the go, I can create the stored procedure.
If I execute the code of the stored procedure by hand by selecting it and execute, I have to use the go.
So what happens in a stored procedure? Does it insert the go's by itself? But then I do not understand the error message of declare cursor above.
go is not an ASE command.
go is a client-side command that tells the client application (eg, isql) that a batch of SQL can now be sent to ASE. In the case of the create or replace procedure ... the go tells the client application (eg, isql) that you've completed the stored proc definition and it can now be submitted to ASE for parsing & compiling.
declare cursor must be in a batch of SQL by itself (ie, declare ...\ngo) if being run from a client application (eg, isql); when inside a stored proc the declare cursor command can be grouped with other follow-on commands (eg, open, fetch).
I know this may seem like a commonly asked question, but I have a unique situation which I can't find an answer to.
I have a simple SSIS package which I want to use to update a table from an Excel spreadsheet. I'll do this using an OLE DB command task which executes a stored procedure. However, it's not retrieving any column names to map. The error is similar to this:
The metadata could not be determined because statement 'insert into #TempTable ... ' uses a temp table.'
I understand why it's returning this error, and know the typical workarounds. However, the error is not coming from the stored procedure that the package calls. That proc doesn't use temp tables. It's a result of the update firing off a database trigger that calls another proc, which DOES use temp tables.
Unfortunately, the triggered proc causing the error is from the third party application I'm developing for, and cannot be modified.
Does anyone know of a solution that doesn't involve adding code to the offending proc?
Thanks!
Option 1, load Excel spreadsheet to a staging table, then use 'Execute SQL Task' to update your final table.
Option 2, create Script task, read from spreadsheet and update your final table, thus avoid going through data flow for column mapping.
Your best bet would be to stage the updates to a dedicated table (OLE DB Destination instead) and then have an Execute SQL Task as a successor event.
Within the Execute SQL Task, set up a cursor to shred the staging table and then call your stored procedure.
DECLARE CSR CURSOR
READ_ONLY
FOR SELECT Col1, Col2
FROM staging;
DECLARE #Col1 nvarchar(100)
, #Col2 nvarchar(100);
OPEN CSR;
FETCH NEXT FROM CSR INTO #Col1, #Col2;
WHILE (##fetch_status <> -1)
BEGIN
IF (##fetch_status <> -2)
BEGIN
EXECUTE dbo.MyProcedure #Col1, #Col2;
END
FETCH NEXT FROM CSR INTO #Col1, #Col2;
END
CLOSE CSR;
DEALLOCATE CSR;
The staging table approach occurred to me shortly after I posted this, and that's the route I went with. While not ideal for such a simple package, it does work. A cursor won't even be necessary...for this package, I can simply update the appropriate table from the staging table, no need for a stored proc. Thanks to you both!
We have an SSIS package that calls a Stored Proc to populate a variable object (full result set).
This is fine.
Now we have a need to call that same stored proc again but with different parameters. So really two sets of data that we want stored all together in the same variable object.
If I populate it a second time, does it overwrite what was there, or append to it?
I do this
Execute SQL Task
ResultSet = Full result set
SQLStatement - executes the stored procedure etc.
Result Set
Result Name = 0
Variable Name = User::Subscriptions
I want that to stay. But want to have a second Execute SQL Task that does the exact same thing, just executes the same stored proc with a different parameter. And I want the User::Subscription variable to hold the results of the 1st Execute SQL Task plus the 2nd Execute SQL task. Is this possible?
Adding another Execute SQL Task will overwrite first result set, you can achieve this using the following workaround:
In the Execute SQL task create a Temp table, Insert all result sets into it, select all recored from this temp table in your result set:
Your query will look like:
CREATE TABLE #TblTemp(Column1 varchar(50), .....)
INSERT INTO #TblTemp(Column1 varchar(50), .....)
EXEC Stored_Procedure_1
INSERT INTO #TblTemp(Column1 varchar(50), .....)
EXEC Stored_Procedure_2
SELECT * FROM #TblTemp
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"
I want to take a series of xml files and pull the xml of the file into a table in the database. I have a for each file enumerator, then an xml task to pull out the dtd and put the contents in a variable. Now that I have the file name and the contents in a variable, I need to insert both pieces of data into the database.
My table to store the data looks like this:
create table Import_Files
(
SequenceId int IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL,
FileName varchar(200) NOT NULL,
FileXml xml NOT NULL,
Created datetime DEFAULT(GETDATE()) NOT NULL,
Processed bit DEFAULT(0) NOT NULL
)
My Stored procedure:
CREATE PROCEDURE [dbo].[AddFile]
#FileName varchar(200),
#FileXml xml
AS
BEGIN
-- SET NOCOUNT ON added to prevent extra result sets from
-- interfering with SELECT statements.
SET NOCOUNT ON;
--Add new record
INSERT INTO Import_Files
([FileName], FileXml)
VALUES
(#FileName, #FileXml)
END
I can't get it to work because hte xml data type isn't available in my execute sql task. Any ideas on how to make this work?
I would look at the import column transformation. It allows you to import the contents of a file for each row in a dataflow. The data source would simply be a listing of each file and any other column level meta data you need.
This would probably be more performant then doing a row by row insert from a spro
More info on setting this up here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms141262.aspx
Have you tried using a string datatype?
As sugested earlier change the proc to accept a string datatype varchar(max) and do a convert to xml in the proc if you must store it in an xml column
Instead of using an Execute SQL Task, I would use an XML Source - generate all the fields you wanted into columns and then just pass those into the database table using an OLE DB Destination. This way you don't have to even use your stored procedure since SSIS already would do these inserts for you and it would recognize your xml type.
I had to use a Script task and call the sproc through code.