Passing log on info to sub reports

I am trying to access a Crystal report from ASP. This report has a linked sub report. I am able to view the main report from the ASP page. but when i access the sub report i get the error--> Server has not been started. which means that my sub report is not getting the database log on info. i tried passin the info with the code available on net. but the first line itself fails saying Object does not suppot this method. My code is

set crSections=session("oRpt").sections
'if i print the error message here it says object does not support this method.

For Each crSection In crSections
crReportObjects = crSection.ReportObjects

'loop through all the report objects to find all the subreports
For Each crReportObject In crReportObjects
If crReportObject.Kind = ReportObjectKind.SubreportObject Then

'you will need to typecast the reportobject to a subreport()
'object once you find it

crSubreportObject = CType(crReportObject, SubreportObject)
'open the subreport object
crSubreportDocument = crSubreportObject.OpenSubreport(crSubreportObject.SubreportName)

'set the database and tables objects to work with the subreport()
crDatabase = crSubreportDocument.Database
crTables = crDatabase.Tables
'loop through all the tables in the subreport and
'set up the connection info and apply it to the tables
For Each crTable In crTables
crTable.SetLogOnInfo "test" , "","test","test"
if crTable.TestConnectivity then
Response.Write "Connecting to sub" ' I am getting this message

end if

Next

End If
Next
Next

please point out what i am doin wrong. Greatly appreciate the help!The culprit is
crSubreportObject = CType(crReportObject, SubreportObject)
i commented this line and it works! :)

Passing authentication from PHP to reporting services

Hello,

My boss wants me to create a front end webpage for our Reporting
Services reports that customers can log onto through a webform. I'm a
PHP programmer, so I'd rather do this site and the authentication in
PHP than learn .NET. The main problem I see is finding a way to pass
the authentication to Reporting Services so that when a user runs a
report, they are not asked to enter their password a second time.

I don't even know where to start researching this problem... I've asked
in PHP forums and they passed me to you guys. Any ideas?

AndrewIf no one knows the answer to this, does anyone know a better place
that I could ask this question?|||andrewdmason@.gmail.com (andrewdmason@.gmail.com) writes:
> If no one knows the answer to this, does anyone know a better place
> that I could ask this question?

That would be microsoft.public.sqlserver.repotingsvcs.

If your local newserver does not carry it, it's available at
msnews.microsoft.com.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp|||Setup anonymous authentication (instead of NT Challenge Response, the
default) for MS Reporting services and diallow all connections besides
the PHP server and then you don't have to worry about authentication at
all.

Erland Sommarskog wrote:
> andrewdmason@.gmail.com (andrewdmason@.gmail.com) writes:
> > If no one knows the answer to this, does anyone know a better place
> > that I could ask this question?
> That would be microsoft.public.sqlserver.repotingsvcs.
> If your local newserver does not carry it, it's available at
> msnews.microsoft.com.
>
> --
> Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
> Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp

Pass through Authentication

We have Reporting Services 2000 standard edition installed and everything works fine. You can log in and run reports and the Reporting Services security rolls work. The problem is when a user goes to the url of reporting services web server it prompts them for a login. They enter their Windows domain login and they get in. Is there a way to configure Reporting Services to use the user's Windows Domain login credentials (pass through) and not prompt for them, similar toSharePoint.Here is our configuration:

We have a NT Domain (not active directory) all servers and client machine’s are in the same domain.
IIS for Reporting Services is set to authenticate users by Integrated Windows authentication, Enable anonymous is unchecked.
Server is running Windows Server 2003 Web Edition
Database security utilizes sql server login and is storedin the data source.

We are also planning to move the access to Reporting Services through SharePoint.Don’t know if that will complicate this login issue

Thanks

Enable anonymous access should be checked. Username and password credentials should be given, uncheck Integrated Windows authentication|||

I have a DotNetNuke portal running Reports from Reporting Services. I am having a problem because each time I access my ReportServer on a browser I am asked to authenticate myself. I am currently hosting my database on a hosting services company and I only have access to the Report Manager. Where should I define the access properties in the report manager for my report server?

The user I must use to authenticate is the main user which has full access to reports so this is not a viable solution.

Thanks for your help.

partitions

Hi,
I have a question in the middle beetween Windows and SQL.
I have RAID 5 system and then I can put SQL database and log file where i
want...
But..
Can be important create more logical partitions in RAID system for improve
defrag efficiency?
Example: I have only one database in SQL. I create a system partition C, a
database partition D and a log partition E.
Can I have better performance putting database in D and log in E?
Thank's a lot.. and sotty for my english..
Andrea
Since the drives are all a single Raid 5 you will not gain any performance by
spreading the data to the D drive and logs to the E drive.
"Rusty73" wrote:

> Hi,
> I have a question in the middle beetween Windows and SQL.
> I have RAID 5 system and then I can put SQL database and log file where i
> want...
> But..
> Can be important create more logical partitions in RAID system for improve
> defrag efficiency?
> Example: I have only one database in SQL. I create a system partition C, a
> database partition D and a log partition E.
> Can I have better performance putting database in D and log in E?
> Thank's a lot.. and sotty for my english..
> Andrea
>
>
|||I know that log files are writing sequentially to the disk btu with RAID 5 i
can decide to block the writing only on log disk...
but I can have no better performance to the defrag of log?
"fnguy" <fnguy@.discussions.microsoft.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:B17E4200-29D1-429B-AD10-B2A9C41DC43B@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Since the drives are all a single Raid 5 you will not gain any performance
> by
> spreading the data to the D drive and logs to the E drive.
>
> "Rusty73" wrote:
|||The best way to combat file fragmentation is to create the database files
once, as large as you will need them. If the files are allocated
contigueously, and never grow, then no file fragmentation will occur. Make
sure you give enough room for the Index Defrags, that will use internal data
pages, not file fragments to reorganize, again, as long as the file does not
grow.
Go ahead and leave the AUTOGROW feature on, but only as a fail-safe, in case
you've underestimated the space you will need.
Besides, file fragmentation will only affect scans and DSS type queries.
For a true OLTP system, the disk and database page access will be pretty
random, which will not be affected as much by file level fragmentation.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas

"Rusty73" <rusty77@.libero.it> wrote in message
news:%23iqlJn6tFHA.3932@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
I know that log files are writing sequentially to the disk btu with RAID 5 i
can decide to block the writing only on log disk...
but I can have no better performance to the defrag of log?
"fnguy" <fnguy@.discussions.microsoft.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:B17E4200-29D1-429B-AD10-B2A9C41DC43B@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Since the drives are all a single Raid 5 you will not gain any performance
> by
> spreading the data to the D drive and logs to the E drive.
>
> "Rusty73" wrote:
|||Hi there,
Raid 5 will give you better performance for the DB.
For logs is best to create a mirror pair for improved performance, exactly
because of sequential writing.
My server is configured as follows:
system partition C - array of 2 mirrored drives - RAID 1
DB partition - array of a few disks in raid 5
log partition - another pair of mirrored drives - RAID 1
I agree with the previous comment that having different logical partitions
on the same disk array will not improve performance.
Hope this helps.
Kind regards,
Doru
"Anthony Thomas" <ALThomas@.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:u7bc6z$tFHA.2848@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> The best way to combat file fragmentation is to create the database files
> once, as large as you will need them. If the files are allocated
> contigueously, and never grow, then no file fragmentation will occur.
> Make
> sure you give enough room for the Index Defrags, that will use internal
> data
> pages, not file fragments to reorganize, again, as long as the file does
> not
> grow.
> Go ahead and leave the AUTOGROW feature on, but only as a fail-safe, in
> case
> you've underestimated the space you will need.
> Besides, file fragmentation will only affect scans and DSS type queries.
> For a true OLTP system, the disk and database page access will be pretty
> random, which will not be affected as much by file level fragmentation.
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Thomas
>
> --
> "Rusty73" <rusty77@.libero.it> wrote in message
> news:%23iqlJn6tFHA.3932@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> I know that log files are writing sequentially to the disk btu with RAID 5
> i
> can decide to block the writing only on log disk...
> but I can have no better performance to the defrag of log?
> "fnguy" <fnguy@.discussions.microsoft.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
> news:B17E4200-29D1-429B-AD10-B2A9C41DC43B@.microsoft.com...
>

partitions

Hi,
I have a question in the middle beetween Windows and SQL.
I have RAID 5 system and then I can put SQL database and log file where i
want...
But..
Can be important create more logical partitions in RAID system for improve
defrag efficiency'
Example: I have only one database in SQL. I create a system partition C, a
database partition D and a log partition E.
Can I have better performance putting database in D and log in E?
Thank's a lot.. and sotty for my english..
AndreaSince the drives are all a single Raid 5 you will not gain any performance b
y
spreading the data to the D drive and logs to the E drive.
"Rusty73" wrote:

> Hi,
> I have a question in the middle beetween Windows and SQL.
> I have RAID 5 system and then I can put SQL database and log file where i
> want...
> But..
> Can be important create more logical partitions in RAID system for improve
> defrag efficiency'
> Example: I have only one database in SQL. I create a system partition C, a
> database partition D and a log partition E.
> Can I have better performance putting database in D and log in E?
> Thank's a lot.. and sotty for my english..
> Andrea
>
>|||I know that log files are writing sequentially to the disk btu with RAID 5 i
can decide to block the writing only on log disk...
but I can have no better performance to the defrag of log?
"fnguy" <fnguy@.discussions.microsoft.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:B17E4200-29D1-429B-AD10-B2A9C41DC43B@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Since the drives are all a single Raid 5 you will not gain any performance
> by
> spreading the data to the D drive and logs to the E drive.
>
> "Rusty73" wrote:
>|||The best way to combat file fragmentation is to create the database files
once, as large as you will need them. If the files are allocated
contigueously, and never grow, then no file fragmentation will occur. Make
sure you give enough room for the Index Defrags, that will use internal data
pages, not file fragments to reorganize, again, as long as the file does not
grow.
Go ahead and leave the AUTOGROW feature on, but only as a fail-safe, in case
you've underestimated the space you will need.
Besides, file fragmentation will only affect scans and DSS type queries.
For a true OLTP system, the disk and database page access will be pretty
random, which will not be affected as much by file level fragmentation.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Rusty73" <rusty77@.libero.it> wrote in message
news:%23iqlJn6tFHA.3932@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
I know that log files are writing sequentially to the disk btu with RAID 5 i
can decide to block the writing only on log disk...
but I can have no better performance to the defrag of log?
"fnguy" <fnguy@.discussions.microsoft.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:B17E4200-29D1-429B-AD10-B2A9C41DC43B@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Since the drives are all a single Raid 5 you will not gain any performance
> by
> spreading the data to the D drive and logs to the E drive.
>
> "Rusty73" wrote:
>|||Hi there,
Raid 5 will give you better performance for the DB.
For logs is best to create a mirror pair for improved performance, exactly
because of sequential writing.
My server is configured as follows:
system partition C - array of 2 mirrored drives - RAID 1
DB partition - array of a few disks in raid 5
log partition - another pair of mirrored drives - RAID 1
I agree with the previous comment that having different logical partitions
on the same disk array will not improve performance.
Hope this helps.
Kind regards,
Doru
"Anthony Thomas" <ALThomas@.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:u7bc6z$tFHA.2848@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> The best way to combat file fragmentation is to create the database files
> once, as large as you will need them. If the files are allocated
> contigueously, and never grow, then no file fragmentation will occur.
> Make
> sure you give enough room for the Index Defrags, that will use internal
> data
> pages, not file fragments to reorganize, again, as long as the file does
> not
> grow.
> Go ahead and leave the AUTOGROW feature on, but only as a fail-safe, in
> case
> you've underestimated the space you will need.
> Besides, file fragmentation will only affect scans and DSS type queries.
> For a true OLTP system, the disk and database page access will be pretty
> random, which will not be affected as much by file level fragmentation.
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Thomas
>
> --
> "Rusty73" <rusty77@.libero.it> wrote in message
> news:%23iqlJn6tFHA.3932@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> I know that log files are writing sequentially to the disk btu with RAID 5
> i
> can decide to block the writing only on log disk...
> but I can have no better performance to the defrag of log?
> "fnguy" <fnguy@.discussions.microsoft.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
> news:B17E4200-29D1-429B-AD10-B2A9C41DC43B@.microsoft.com...
>

partitions

Hi,
I have a question in the middle beetween Windows and SQL.
I have RAID 5 system and then I can put SQL database and log file where i
want...
But..
Can be important create more logical partitions in RAID system for improve
defrag efficiency'
Example: I have only one database in SQL. I create a system partition C, a
database partition D and a log partition E.
Can I have better performance putting database in D and log in E?
Thank's a lot.. and sotty for my english..
AndreaSince the drives are all a single Raid 5 you will not gain any performance by
spreading the data to the D drive and logs to the E drive.
"Rusty73" wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a question in the middle beetween Windows and SQL.
> I have RAID 5 system and then I can put SQL database and log file where i
> want...
> But..
> Can be important create more logical partitions in RAID system for improve
> defrag efficiency'
> Example: I have only one database in SQL. I create a system partition C, a
> database partition D and a log partition E.
> Can I have better performance putting database in D and log in E?
> Thank's a lot.. and sotty for my english..
> Andrea
>
>|||I know that log files are writing sequentially to the disk btu with RAID 5 i
can decide to block the writing only on log disk...
but I can have no better performance to the defrag of log?
"fnguy" <fnguy@.discussions.microsoft.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:B17E4200-29D1-429B-AD10-B2A9C41DC43B@.microsoft.com...
> Since the drives are all a single Raid 5 you will not gain any performance
> by
> spreading the data to the D drive and logs to the E drive.
>
> "Rusty73" wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I have a question in the middle beetween Windows and SQL.
>> I have RAID 5 system and then I can put SQL database and log file where i
>> want...
>> But..
>> Can be important create more logical partitions in RAID system for
>> improve
>> defrag efficiency'
>> Example: I have only one database in SQL. I create a system partition C,
>> a
>> database partition D and a log partition E.
>> Can I have better performance putting database in D and log in E?
>> Thank's a lot.. and sotty for my english..
>> Andrea
>>|||The best way to combat file fragmentation is to create the database files
once, as large as you will need them. If the files are allocated
contigueously, and never grow, then no file fragmentation will occur. Make
sure you give enough room for the Index Defrags, that will use internal data
pages, not file fragments to reorganize, again, as long as the file does not
grow.
Go ahead and leave the AUTOGROW feature on, but only as a fail-safe, in case
you've underestimated the space you will need.
Besides, file fragmentation will only affect scans and DSS type queries.
For a true OLTP system, the disk and database page access will be pretty
random, which will not be affected as much by file level fragmentation.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas
"Rusty73" <rusty77@.libero.it> wrote in message
news:%23iqlJn6tFHA.3932@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
I know that log files are writing sequentially to the disk btu with RAID 5 i
can decide to block the writing only on log disk...
but I can have no better performance to the defrag of log?
"fnguy" <fnguy@.discussions.microsoft.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:B17E4200-29D1-429B-AD10-B2A9C41DC43B@.microsoft.com...
> Since the drives are all a single Raid 5 you will not gain any performance
> by
> spreading the data to the D drive and logs to the E drive.
>
> "Rusty73" wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I have a question in the middle beetween Windows and SQL.
>> I have RAID 5 system and then I can put SQL database and log file where i
>> want...
>> But..
>> Can be important create more logical partitions in RAID system for
>> improve
>> defrag efficiency'
>> Example: I have only one database in SQL. I create a system partition C,
>> a
>> database partition D and a log partition E.
>> Can I have better performance putting database in D and log in E?
>> Thank's a lot.. and sotty for my english..
>> Andrea
>>|||Hi there,
Raid 5 will give you better performance for the DB.
For logs is best to create a mirror pair for improved performance, exactly
because of sequential writing.
My server is configured as follows:
system partition C - array of 2 mirrored drives - RAID 1
DB partition - array of a few disks in raid 5
log partition - another pair of mirrored drives - RAID 1
I agree with the previous comment that having different logical partitions
on the same disk array will not improve performance.
Hope this helps.
Kind regards,
Doru
"Anthony Thomas" <ALThomas@.kc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:u7bc6z$tFHA.2848@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> The best way to combat file fragmentation is to create the database files
> once, as large as you will need them. If the files are allocated
> contigueously, and never grow, then no file fragmentation will occur.
> Make
> sure you give enough room for the Index Defrags, that will use internal
> data
> pages, not file fragments to reorganize, again, as long as the file does
> not
> grow.
> Go ahead and leave the AUTOGROW feature on, but only as a fail-safe, in
> case
> you've underestimated the space you will need.
> Besides, file fragmentation will only affect scans and DSS type queries.
> For a true OLTP system, the disk and database page access will be pretty
> random, which will not be affected as much by file level fragmentation.
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Thomas
>
> --
> "Rusty73" <rusty77@.libero.it> wrote in message
> news:%23iqlJn6tFHA.3932@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> I know that log files are writing sequentially to the disk btu with RAID 5
> i
> can decide to block the writing only on log disk...
> but I can have no better performance to the defrag of log?
> "fnguy" <fnguy@.discussions.microsoft.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
> news:B17E4200-29D1-429B-AD10-B2A9C41DC43B@.microsoft.com...
>> Since the drives are all a single Raid 5 you will not gain any
>> performance
>> by
>> spreading the data to the D drive and logs to the E drive.
>>
>> "Rusty73" wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I have a question in the middle beetween Windows and SQL.
>> I have RAID 5 system and then I can put SQL database and log file where
>> i
>> want...
>> But..
>> Can be important create more logical partitions in RAID system for
>> improve
>> defrag efficiency'
>> Example: I have only one database in SQL. I create a system partition C,
>> a
>> database partition D and a log partition E.
>> Can I have better performance putting database in D and log in E?
>> Thank's a lot.. and sotty for my english..
>> Andrea
>>
>