SQLServerCentral / Article Discussions / Article Discussions by Author / Discuss content posted by Prakriti Agrawal / SSRS timeout / Latest Posts

RE: SSRS timeout

Paul White — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 08:45:34 GMT

Tedious question. Just the sort of pointless detail I do not need in my head.

RE: SSRS timeout

Peter Trast — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:41:28 GMT

I should have known to avoid a question with version mixing , i.e. SSRS SQL Server 2000 :-DGot me! I chose 0 like everyone else using SSRS (2005 or 2008) because left blank or set to zero, it is always set to zero "under the hood"...I shall watch more closely next time...

RE: SSRS timeout

L' Eomot Inversé — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 10:02:16 GMT

[quote][b]Steve Jones - Editor (2/15/2010)[/b][hr]The question has had the version added.[/quote]But it still says SSRS, which surely is the name used from SQLS 2005 onwards, not the one used in SQLS 2000?

RE: SSRS timeout

Aeterna — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 07:09:40 GMT

[quote][b]CirquedeSQLeil (2/15/2010)[/b]You lured me back - I couldn't resist the earlier comment. I already got the equivalent points by posting multiple times to this thread. As you have done as well :hehe::hehe:[/quote]Well, in which case, I claim my second point too.... ;-)

RE: SSRS timeout

SQLRNNR — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:36:02 GMT

[quote][b]bitbucket-25253 (2/15/2010)[/b][hr]Jason And Steve was off today on a ski trip ... but he did manage to add to the question "SQL Server 2000". but said nothing about awarding points to thos who answered correctly, but incorrectly to the original question.Shall I cry [b][size="4"]I want my point awarded[/size][/b]as I said before "Oh well"[/quote]You lured me back - I couldn't resist the earlier comment. I already got the equivalent points by posting multiple times to this thread. As you have done as well :hehe::hehe:

RE: SSRS timeout

bitbucket-25253 — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 18:14:47 GMT

Jason And Steve was off today on a ski trip ... but he did manage to add to the question "SQL Server 2000". but said nothing about awarding points to thos who answered correctly, but incorrectly to the original question.Shall I cry [b][size="4"]I want my point awarded[/size][/b]as I said before "Oh well"

RE: SSRS timeout

SQLRNNR — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:58:13 GMT

I find it interesting that the question has only been answered correctly 10% of the time. And 70% of the people missing the question all missed it selecting the same answer.Thanks for the question at any rate. I will go back to the darkness now :-P

RE: SSRS timeout

SanjayAttray — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 14:06:19 GMT

What a fluke. I got right. I thought it should be 0 but SSC would not post a simple question with 2 points. Apart from 0 only leave it blank looked a logical answer. What ever.Discussion was good than the question.

RE: SSRS timeout

SQLRNNR — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 10:37:24 GMT

[quote][b] Chad Crawford (2/15/2010)[/b][hr]Ahhh.... that might explain what looked like a contradiction. Maybe it is the GUI that accepts blank/zero but the XML underneath is always zero. That would make sense. Thanks!Chad[/quote]Then at the very least, there should have been two possible correct answers. Either of the two answers blank or 0 should have been viable.(just spurning on the debate)

RE: SSRS timeout

Chad Crawford — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 10:33:27 GMT

Ahhh.... that might explain what looked like a contradiction. Maybe it is the GUI that accepts blank/zero but the XML underneath is always zero. That would make sense. Thanks!Chad

RE: SSRS timeout

Oleg Netchaev — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:59:59 GMT

As far as the [b]SqlCommand[/b] is concerned, there is only one way to set the timeout such that report does not time out - set it to zero. In other words, even though documentation for SQL Server 2005 states to leave it blank, what happens under the hood is that [b]CommandTimeout[/b] property, which "gets or sets the wait time in seconds before terminating the attempt to execute a command and generating an error", ends up with the value equal to zero. It has always been like this, even in old ADODB. Too bad that Microsoft changed the usual way of instructing queries not to timeout from the traditional set it to zero to leave it blank in SQL Server 2000/2005 (which will under the hood set it to zero for you).With version added, this happens to be a very good question. I missed it because CommandTimeout = 0 seems to be the only way to do it correctly. As a matter of fact, if you use the code to programmatically set the CommandTimeout then there is no GUI to do it for you and you do indeed have to type [b][yourCommandInstance].CommandTimeout = 0[/b], because in the code it will not accept the value of blank and if you don't explicitly set it then it will get its respective default value, which happens to be 30 seconds. :-) This is still true in any version.Oleg

RE: SSRS timeout

Chad Crawford — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:09:52 GMT

As Scooby would say, "Ruh rhow!" - there seems to be a conflict in the documentation. [url=http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa275100(SQL.80).aspx]Timeout Element (SQL 2000)[/url] states:The value for the Timeout element must be between 0 and 2147483647. If the value is omitted or is 0, the query does not time out.Anyone have 2000 installed that can see what really happens?Thanks,Chad

RE: SSRS timeout

Steve Jones - SSC Editor — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 07:35:53 GMT

The question has had the version added.

RE: SSRS timeout

sjimmo — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 07:23:37 GMT

:exclamationmark: I have a definite problem with this QOD. WHICH VERSION? When the version is missing, I assume that the question is referencing the most current version and not the one that is on extended support. The link provided is for SS2000. I believe that if the question was answered correctly for either of these versions, then the points should be given and the question marked as correct. The QOD SHOULD include the version that the question is about. Not having the version CAN cause the wrong answer, and thus the arguments seen lately.Having "assumed" SS2008, I answered 0. For 2005 and 2000, the answer is leave it empty. (See below)SQL Server 2000TimeoutType the number of seconds until the query times out. The default is 30 seconds. The value for Timeout must be empty or greater than zero. If it is empty, the query does not time out.SQL Server 2005TimeoutType the number of seconds that the report server waits for a response from the database. The default value is 30 seconds. Timeout must contain a value greater than zero or be left empty. If it is empty, the query does not time out.SQL Server 2008TimeoutIn Timeout, type the number of seconds that the report server waits for a response from the database. The default value is 0 seconds. When the time out value is 0 seconds, the query does not time out.

RE: SSRS timeout

free_mascot — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 05:14:36 GMT

Me too... went wrong and lost the point :(The term used in question is SSRS which is not used for the SQL Server 2000 and the reference is given for the version SQL Server 2000.It would be good to have specific version.

RE: SSRS timeout

Aeterna — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 03:36:25 GMT

I have to agree with those who have asked for the version of SQL Server to be specifed in future. SQL 2008 clearly states a value of 0 as the "never time out" value; SQL 2000 and 2005 state a value of blank or greater than 0.It's surely not a surprise that the majority of those who answered this question assuming that the unstated version meant the question referred to the latest version of SQL Server?

RE: SSRS timeout

ohack — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 03:30:36 GMT

A somewhat ambiguous question again - as in even knowing the answer still left 2 answers as valid. If you leave the timeout box empty and click ok (SSRS 2008) it will have a zero in it when you reopen it - or you can just put a zero in there. Needless to say I was unlucky and got it "wrong".

RE: SSRS timeout

Andeavour — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 01:44:20 GMT

Should have read the question better. The defining clue was in "(in dataset)".Once you start looking into controling the timeouts in the Dataset, then you find the answer quoted in the documentation.Another lesson in reading the question more carefully :)

RE: SSRS timeout

Kelsey Thornton — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 01:25:18 GMT

Until I read the posts here I was going to write "Good Question".I had to search around a bit until I found the answer.Looking at the MS web page [url=http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms160345(SQL.90).aspx]http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms160345(SQL.90).aspx[/url] (to which I navigated after doing a search on MSDN), I found the "correct" answer.I think I'll still say "Good Question" anyway :-)

RE: SSRS timeout

Stewart "Arturius" Campbell — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 23:33:59 GMT

I must regrettably add to the confusion...this is, once again, a version issue.in 2000, the tool was only called Reporting ServiceSSRS 2005 requires the timeout to be left blank,SSRS 2008 requires the timeout to be 0,Please include which version is being referred to in the QotD.

RE: SSRS timeout

SQLRNNR — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 15:41:22 GMT

d'ohI missed this question due to going with documentation stating that 0 is the value that should be set.Most people have missed it so far - and that is kind of interesting. The reason for that happening seems to be differences found in documentation.hmmm....

RE: SSRS timeout

bitbucket-25253 — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 15:03:00 GMT

Iggy-SQL Check out this link:SQL Server 2005 Books Online (November 2008)Reporting Services Enhancements[url]http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms170438(SQL.90).aspx[/url]This may clear up some of the confusion then again it may not

RE: SSRS timeout

Iggy-SQL — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 14:24:06 GMT

Sorry, your explanation and answer is only valid for SQL 2000. SQL 2008 requires the time out value to be 0 for the query not to time out. Whilst I appreciate you taking time to create the QotD, next time please specify the SQL version to avoid confusion. Furthermore, I never knew SQL 2000 reporting is also referred to as SSRS, as far as I know (but I know I have limited knowledge), the term SSRS started in SQL 2005 onwards.Reference for SQL 2008: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms160345.aspx

RE: SSRS timeout

bitbucket-25253 — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:57:37 GMT

From the question [quote]under timeout (in dataset):[/quote]Sorry to say this but the page referenced in the explanation does not match the Microsoft page:[b]SQL Server 2008[/b] Books Online (November 2009)How to: Create a Dataset (Reporting Services)at:[url]http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms160345.aspx[/url][quote]6. In Timeout, type the number of seconds that the report server waits for a response from the database. The default value is 0 seconds. [b]When the time out value is 0 seconds, the query does not time out.[/b][/quote] The above page does not correspond to the authors statement that 30 seconds is the default value......hmmmmNow:[url]http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms160345(SQL.90).aspx[/url][b]SQL Server 2005[/b] Books Online (November 2008)How to: Create a Dataset (Report Designer)Updated: 14 April 2006 It Says:[quote]6. In Timeout, type the number of seconds that the report server waits for a response from the database. [b]The default value is 30 seconds. Timeout must contain a value greater than zero or be left empty. If it is empty, the query does not time out[/b].[/quote]Here we go again another big arguement/discussion on the quality of the QOD .... [B]OH WELL[/B]

SSRS timeout

agrawal.prakriti — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 15:15:32 GMT

Comments posted to this topic are about the item [B]SSRS timeout[/B]