I think that xml can be good once is a while... It's like cursor, they have their good use that will beat a set solution... but it happens so rarely...

The boss has started thinking that it's time to start doing a full rewrite of the application... I'll try making him chose the .net environement... and then I'll chose C#...

This is sctricly a guess here, but you're still not qualifying the objects with there owners... I'm really not sure that this is the problem here but it could be...

Your picture didn't show up.. can you describe the problem instead?

Is this what you need?

Select DateTime as DATE, CallTypeID as skillgrp,SUM(CallsOfferedHalf) AS offered

From dbo.t_Call_Type_Half_Hour where (CallTypeID=5002) AND (CONVERT(CHAR(11),DateTime) LIKE CONVERT(CHAR(11),GETDATE()))

GROUP BY DateTime, CallTypeID

You can always make a select of the tickets that need to be updated. Once you have that you can do something like this :

UPDATE T SET...

R u sure this would work??

Looks like you're returning a null anyways if not match is found...

Really bad. It means that once everybody is out of the database it closes itself. Which doesn't seem really bad, but if you have 200 of those on...

this will update all rows ALWAYS, there's no where condition to filter the rows to update, so if no value is found in TicketPriceExVat then a null will be...

I wish I could go back to .net... stuck in access .

check if the databases are set to autoclose

Hey Lowell, there's a catch in asp : the vb constants are not all available : (adInteger) doesn't exists unless you have some include file that I don't remember.

This is the procedure to write on the server

CREATE PROCEDURE dbo.SearchBookDetails @Title as varchar(50)

AS

SET NOCOUNT ON

SELECT

Col1, Col2

FROM dbo.BookDetails

WHERE Title LIKE '%' + @Title + '%'

SET NOCOUNT OFF

GO

now to...

Declare @Title

set @Title = 'Harry potter''s adventure'

Select * from dbo.BookDetails where Title LIKE '%' + @Title + '%'

Put this in a stored proc and you're set.

You don't HAVE TO but it's better than doing a derived table like I did since it can be modified in the table instead of in the procs...