Chris Morris (1/14/2009)

---

Jeff Moden (1/13/2009)

---

Oooohhhh.... I might be in trouble... I've got buckets full...

The new tool set is better. Upgrading the project and re-deploying and processing will give you an opportunity to look carefully at the cubes and make any necessary adjustments....

I wouldn't necessarily reduce the batch size, but reducing the commit size may be helpful.

It is the length of the transaction that becomes a problem. If all of your...

Your proposed solution will have some "blocking" of sorts. First, the update at the end of the token status will still have to take some locks during the update....

GSquared (1/13/2009)

---

Michael Earl (1/13/2009)

---

I particularly like his comment:

[font="Comic Sans MS"]Multi datasets is one of the powerful tools in Reporting Services. The answer is in knowing the product, not...

A VPN tunnel would suggest you can enable traffic on any port you wish without additional encryption.

So, assuming you have enough bandwidth, you can treat the servers as if they...

I particularly like his comment:

[font="Comic Sans MS"]Multi datasets is one of the powerful tools in Reporting Services. The answer is in knowing the product, not 'don't do that'.[/font]

If...

As far as the join style - Jeff, you are crazy. The JOIN keyword is much more readable. Ok, you are not crazy, it is all opinion. ...

You can upgrade that way if you want to.

I would recommend using BIDS 2008 to upgrade your project, deploying to the 2008 server and doing a full proces of all...

Unless you need to have schema or procedures different based on the inspection company, I would put everything in a single database.

First, every time you get a new inspection company,...

You can use expressions to set the command for this data source to the value of your variable.

happycat - you would need to move your additional criteria into the join.

[font="Courier New"]SELECT

SO.Name

,...

For a quick solution, you can check the row count of the indexes on the tables rather than counting the actual rows.

[font="Courier New"]SELECT

SO.Name

, SI.RowCnt

FROM

SysObjects SO

LEFT JOIN SysIndexes SI ON SO.ID...

I agree with the 2008 suggestion. Don't upgrade to 2005. 2008 is exactly the same process and the compatibility is virtually the same.

As far as a database name...

A primary key on a combination of all of the foreign keys in the table is probably inappropriate. Since it may be necessary for you to add reversal records...