Creating a schema called 'master' - sql-server

I've created a schema called master in SS2008, however every time I type in the word, it's formatted as blue, rather than black. Should I be worried? I've checked the reserved word list, and it doesn't seem to be on there.

It probably thinks you are refering to the system database which is named master. I would think that is Master is a reserved keyword. Here is a link to what the various color mean.
Red - Character string
Dark Green - Comment
Black, Silver Background - SQLCMD command
Magenta - System function
Green - System table
Blue - Keyword
Teal - Line numbers or template parameter
Maroon - SQL Server stored procedure
Dark Grey - Operators

It is highlighted blue because master is one of the four system databases in sql server - master, model, msdb, and tempdb.

Master is one of the system databases and to reduce confusion should be modified for clarity. Also the SQL parser may first look in the system master database before realizing that your referring to your schema. I know this applies if 'sys' is used when naming objects.

Related

sp_help - table is referenced by an 'empty string' schema bound view

I'm trying to systematically determine the differences in schema between a local database and a remote database administered by someone else. I've had the remote administrator run a script that executed sp_help and sp_helptext on a variety of objects.
There is one difference I don't know how to account for. On my local system sp_help on one table produces a line of message output No views with schema binding reference table 'dbo.tbl'.
On the remote system, the output was 'Table is referenced by views' followed by a blank line. The query was run with output as text so this indicates on the remote machine a one row result set was produced with an empty string (or NULL?) value.
How can that happen? If I create a schema bound view locally I get the 'Table is referenced by views' output followed by the name of the view plainly displayed. What scenario on the remote machine could be producing this result set without any view name recorded?
To answer your question requires knowledge of the internal workings of sp_help. You are welcome to descend into the depths of procedures that are called by sp_help. If you do, you will see that this procedure uses sysdepends - which is both not "dependable" and obsolete. Ref: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/relational-databases/system-compatibility-views/sys-sysdepends-transact-sql . The short answer is that something has been altered/renamed in a way that is not captured in sysdepends.

SQL Server Mgmt Studio shows "invalid column name" when listing columns?

I'm used to scripting in Python or Matlab, and my first couple hours with SQL have been infuriating. I would like to make a list of columns appear on the screen in any way, shape, or form; but when I use commands like
select *
from "2Second Log.dbo.TagTable.Columns"
I keep getting the error:
Invalid column name '[the first column in my table]'.
even though I never explicitly asked for [the first column in my table], it found it for me. How can you correctly identify the first column name, and then still claim it's invalid!? Babies will be strangled.
This db was generated by Allen Bradley's FactoryTalk software. What I would really like to do is produce an actual list of "TagName" strings...but I get the same error when I try that. If there were a way to actually double click the table and open it up and look at it (like in Matlab), that would be ideal.
Echoing juergen's suggestion in the comment above. It looks like you're running the query on the master database, not the 2Second Log database that actually has your table. (You can tell this by looking at the database in the dropdown in the top left of your screenshot). Two things you can do:
Change the dropdown in the top left to 2Second Log. This will target your query to a different database
Put your database name in brackets as suggested by juergen i.e. select * from [2Second Log].dbo.TagTable
As an side, if you're looking for a good SQL tutorial, I highly recommend the Mode SQL tutorial. It's a fantastic interactive platform to get your SQL feet wet.
always use brackets when names/field have spaces or dashes.
select * from [2Second Log].dbo.TagTable

Why script generated by SSMS shown in red is different from script stored in system tables

Why script generated by SSMS shown in red is different from script stored in system tables. Please notice stored procedure names in query, query result and Object explorer.
i.e.
All these methods are giving me same script
sql_module
object_definition
sp_helptext
However when generated from SSMS, right click -> script as Create or Modify is giving a different script.
How is it possible and generating different scripts.
The answer can be confusing.
The Stored procedure getBudgets4programManager2 was renamed (very likely using sp_rename https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms188351.aspx), so the original definition does not match the new name. BTW. Notice that the definition stored in metadata will always change the DDL command to CREATE in case of issuing an ALTER PROCEDURE statement.
At the same time, SSMS scripting features will not simply get the definition from metadata as it has an object representation of the stored procedure, it will normalize the schema name & object name, and it may also normalize the DDL command accordingly (CREATE/ALTER). Notice that the schema is showing it is normalized (i.e. [dbo]), and that the current name is also normalized.
As for why the metadata definition is not renamed at the same time you rename the object. The answer is not 100% clear, but such change would affect any features in the SQL Server engine that relies on the definition, including using the WITH ENCRYPTION option on ALTER/CREATE PROCEDURE as well as the verification of digital signatures.
As far as I know, other elements in both versions of the scripts should remain intact (comments, blank spaces, etc.).
I hope this information helps.

How to name an SQLite database so it doesn't have the default name of main?

How can I name an SQLite database so it doesn't have the default name of main?
I don't think so.
The main database has a special meaning.
You can attach other databases with other names.
From http://www.sqlite.org/sqlite.html
The ".databases" command shows a list of all databases open in the current connection. There will always be at least 2. The first one is "main", the original database opened. The second is "temp", the database used for temporary tables. There may be additional databases listed for databases attached using the ATTACH statement. The first output column is the name the database is attached with, and the second column is the filename of the external file.
You can't. "main" is simply the name which SQLite always uses for the primary database that you have open. (If necessary, you can add extra databases using ATTACH, though.)
http://www.sqlite.org/lang_attach.html

Export tables from SQL Server to be imported to Oracle 10g

I'm trying to export some tables from SQL Server 2005 and then create those tables and populate them in Oracle.
I have about 10 tables, varying from 4 columns up to 25. I'm not using any constraints/keys so this should be reasonably straight forward.
Firstly I generated scripts to get the table structure, then modified them to conform to Oracle syntax standards (ie changed the nvarchar to varchar2)
Next I exported the data using SQL Servers export wizard which created a csv flat file. However my main issue is that I can't find a way to force SQL Server to double quote column names. One of my columns contains commas, so unless I can find a method for SQL server to quote column names then I will have trouble when it comes to importing this.
Also, am I going the difficult route, or is there an easier way to do this?
Thanks
EDIT: By quoting I'm refering to quoting the column values in the csv. For example I have a column which contains addresses like
101 High Street, Sometown, Some
county, PO5TC053
Without changing it to the following, it would cause issues when loading the CSV
"101 High Street, Sometown, Some
county, PO5TC053"
After looking at some options with SQLDeveloper, or to manually try to export/import, I found a utility on SQL Server management studio that gets the desired results, and is easy to use, do the following
Goto the source schema on SQL Server
Right click > Export data
Select source as current schema
Select destination as "Oracle OLE provider"
Select properties, then add the service name into the first box, then username and password, be sure to click "remember password"
Enter query to get desired results to be migrated
Enter table name, then click the "Edit" button
Alter mappings, change nvarchars to varchar2, and INTEGER to NUMBER
Run
Repeat process for remaining tables, save as jobs if you need to do this again in the future
Use the SQLDeveloper migration tools
I think quoting column names in oracle is something you should not use. It causes all sort of problems.
As Robert has said, I'd strongly advise agains quoting column names. The result is that you'd have to quote them not only when importing the data, but also whenever you want to reference that column in a SQL statement - and yes, that probably means in your program code as well. Building SQL statements becomes a total hassle!
From what you're writing, I'm not sure if you are referring to the column names or the data in these columns. (Can SQLServer really have a comma in the column name? I'd be really surprised if there was a good reason for that!) Quoting the column content should be done for any string-like columns (although I found that other characters usually work better as the need to "escape" quotes becomes another issue). If you're exporting in CSV that should be an option .. but then I'm not familiar with the export wizard.
Another idea for moving the data (depending on the scale of your project) would be to use an ETL/EAI tool. I've been playing around a bit with the Pentaho suite and their Kettle component. It offered a good range of options to move data from one place to another. It may be a bit oversized for a simple transfer, but if it's a big "migration" with the corresponding volume, it may be a good option.

Resources