Q any group or freeze function

Hello,
I have a rectangle and a few textbox in it, now when I run report, the
textbox goes out of rectangle, Is there any way to group and freeze?Jim,
It sounds like the text box isn't actually IN the rectangle.
Select the textbox and cut it with Ctrl-X
Select the rectangle then paste with Ctrl-V
The textbox should now be inside the rectangle, try dragging it around,
it should be bound by the rectangle now.
Chris
JIM.H. wrote:
> Hello,
> I have a rectangle and a few textbox in it, now when I run report,
> the textbox goes out of rectangle, Is there any way to group and
> freeze?

Puzzled by duplicates

Hello all!

Have a question:

Is there way in SQL to determine duplicate rows without using count(), aggregate functions, group by or select distinct?

I only have regular select, join and delete features.

Basically, what are all the possible ways to determine duplicates in data like this?

col1|col2
----
s1--j1
s1--j4
s1--j1
s1--j3
s1--j2

I greatly appreciate your response!
Thanks!You need to add a third column, a unique ID column. Then you can do this

select t1.* from t1
join t2 on t1.col1=t2.col2 and t1.col2=t2.col2 and t1.id != t2.id

Check out my brand new SQL tutorial at http://www.bitesizeinc.net/index.php/sql.html

-Chris
http://www.bitesizeinc.net/|||Is there way to do it without a unique ID? Not to be persistent, but my original goal was to do it only with those simple SQL statements.

I just wanted to make sure that I tried every way possible. Maybe there is a way to use cartesian product or whichever, but it's gotta be based on these simple statements.

If it can only be done using unique ID or aggregate functions, it's a good answer as well.

Let me know if I sound confusing. Great site btw, very original!.

Thanks for your devotion.|||Thank you so much for visitting my site...

I think that you're out of options here.

The best way is using GROUP BY.

Otherwise, you could select DISTINCT CONCAT(field1,' ',field2)

Or use the unique ID

I can't think of anyway else...

-Chrissql

Put first 10 rows in a table and then group by each 25 rows in ano

Hi.
I would like to put the first 10 rows in a table and not have a page break.
Then in another table (which will be shown on another page) I would like to
show the 25 next rows, add a page break, show the next 25 rows, etc.
I could solve this by
System.Math.Ceiling (RowNumber (Nothing)/10)
or
Add a filter with top N = 10.
The tables are identical and uses the same datasource.
When I set the group to System.Math.Ceiling (RowNumber (Nothing)/25)
on the last table nothing happens. All rows are shown. I thought I could
add a filter with bottom N = CountRows - 10 but CountRows don't work in
filters.
And if it did I probably would have problems with the grouping to add page
breaks.
I know there have been similar requests, but I haven't been able to find a
solution.
Bright ideas are appreciated.I think I'll just make two different datasources.
One with the first then rows and one with the rest,
then bind each table to its datasource.
"Knut" wrote:
> Hi.
> I would like to put the first 10 rows in a table and not have a page break.
> Then in another table (which will be shown on another page) I would like to
> show the 25 next rows, add a page break, show the next 25 rows, etc.
> I could solve this by
> System.Math.Ceiling (RowNumber (Nothing)/10)
> or
> Add a filter with top N = 10.
> The tables are identical and uses the same datasource.
> When I set the group to System.Math.Ceiling (RowNumber (Nothing)/25)
> on the last table nothing happens. All rows are shown. I thought I could
> add a filter with bottom N = CountRows - 10 but CountRows don't work in
> filters.
> And if it did I probably would have problems with the grouping to add page
> breaks.
> I know there have been similar requests, but I haven't been able to find a
> solution.
> Bright ideas are appreciated.

Pull Replication Error 1069

I have a pull replication set up for users who synchronize data once in a
week. This replication is subscribed to a NT group with 5 users.
When a user is trying to synchronize the data, it is giving the error
message 1069 and the service did not start due to a logon failure.
Any help is greatly appreciated to resolve this issue.
David,
please have a look at Neil's explanation:
http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/...376/14376.html
(replication runs as a series of jobs implemented by the sql server agent).
Cheers,
Paul Ibison SQL Server MVP, www.replicationanswers.com
(recommended sql server 2000 replication book:
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602p.html)

Public permissions

Why is the Public group granted permission to the systables in my database?
Is it safe to remove the select permission from all the sys tables?"Mike" <annon@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OzWZVzbGFHA.2412@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Why is the Public group granted permission to the systables in my
database?
> Is it safe to remove the select permission from all the sys tables?
>
Think of "public" as the "everyone" group in NT. It allows the basic,
minimum permissions to the database. Read the following for a better
understanding:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...s/c05ppcsq.mspx
You can remove the select permission from public, be aware that this may
cause other issues with stored procedures, etc.
Steve|||SQL Server uses the system tables internally for some
functions and that's why public has permissions on these
tables. There are functions such as resolving names using
internal ids stored in the system tables. And what
permissions are needed on which tables gets further
complicated by what data access mechanisms are used by what
drivers or providers using what applications or tools. Can
you remove them across the board and not have any problems?
Across the board...no. And it's no simple task to go through
and figure or what can and can't be changed.
-Sue
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:30:33 -0500, "Mike"
<annon@.hotmail.com> wrote:

>Why is the Public group granted permission to the systables in my database?
>Is it safe to remove the select permission from all the sys tables?
>