468,170 Members | 2,103 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 468,170 developers. It's quick & easy.

Problem With View and Changing Field Length

I had a strange situation with a view in SQL 7, that I could use some input
on.

I had a very simple view -- select a, b, c from table1 where x=y and z=q.
Field a in table1 originally was varchar 70. A long time ago I changed it to
varchar 95.

I used this view as an ODBC linked table in an Access MDB. Recently, there
was one row which has a value in field a that was more than 70 characters
long. This caused an error when the view as opened in the MDB file: "string
data, right truncation (#0)"

I went to the view in SQL Server, and displayed the row fine. So I delete
the link to the view in Access, compacted the Access database, and recreated
the link. Same results. The row showed #Error in the linked view, and the
message box with the truncation error would come up.

I went into SQL Server, took the SQL from the view and created a new view. I
linked the new view in Access, and it worked fine. No error.

So it seems that, somehow, view was holding onto the old field length, even
though it was using the new field length when displayed. But when the view
was linked, it used the old field length.

Is there something I could have or should have done short of recreating the
view? Any idea why the view used the old field length when it was linked,
but used the new field length when it was opened directly?

Thanks!

Neil
Jun 27 '08 #1
6 6518
Is there something I could have or should have done short of recreating
the view? Any idea why the view used the old field length when it was
linked, but used the new field length when it was opened directly?
View meta data are stored at the time the view is created so subsequent
changes to the underlying objects won't be reflected in the view. After
making changes to tables referenced by views, you'll need to either recreate
the views or execute sp_refreshview against the views to sync the meta data.

--
Hope this helps.

Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
http://weblogs.sqlteam.com/dang/

"Neil" <no****@nospam.netwrote in message
news:hi****************@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com...
>I had a strange situation with a view in SQL 7, that I could use some input
on.

I had a very simple view -- select a, b, c from table1 where x=y and z=q.
Field a in table1 originally was varchar 70. A long time ago I changed it
to varchar 95.

I used this view as an ODBC linked table in an Access MDB. Recently, there
was one row which has a value in field a that was more than 70 characters
long. This caused an error when the view as opened in the MDB file:
"string data, right truncation (#0)"

I went to the view in SQL Server, and displayed the row fine. So I delete
the link to the view in Access, compacted the Access database, and
recreated the link. Same results. The row showed #Error in the linked
view, and the message box with the truncation error would come up.

I went into SQL Server, took the SQL from the view and created a new view.
I linked the new view in Access, and it worked fine. No error.

So it seems that, somehow, view was holding onto the old field length,
even though it was using the new field length when displayed. But when the
view was linked, it used the old field length.

Is there something I could have or should have done short of recreating
the view? Any idea why the view used the old field length when it was
linked, but used the new field length when it was opened directly?

Thanks!

Neil
Jun 27 '08 #2

"Dan Guzman" <gu******@nospam-online.sbcglobal.netwrote in message
news:u7****************@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...
>Is there something I could have or should have done short of recreating
the view? Any idea why the view used the old field length when it was
linked, but used the new field length when it was opened directly?

View meta data are stored at the time the view is created so subsequent
changes to the underlying objects won't be reflected in the view. After
making changes to tables referenced by views, you'll need to either
recreate the views or execute sp_refreshview against the views to sync the
meta data.
Thanks. Good to know. Is there a way to run sp_refreshview against all
views, sort of as a global refresh? Or is there a feature in EM that might
do this? Thanks.
Jun 27 '08 #3
Neil (no****@nospam.net) writes:
Thanks. Good to know. Is there a way to run sp_refreshview against all
views, sort of as a global refresh? Or is there a feature in EM that might
do this? Thanks.
SELECT 'EXEC sp_refreshview ' + quotename(name)
FROM sysobjects
WHERE type = 'V'

Copy result into a query window and run it.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, es****@sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...ons/books.mspx
Jun 27 '08 #4
Thanks, Erland! Just curious, as more of a theoretical point: why, do you
suppose, SQL Server doesn't reset the metadata when a table's structure has
changed? Seems that if the table structure has changed, the old meta data is
no longer valid. So why not automatically change it?

Thanks.
"Erland Sommarskog" <es****@sommarskog.sewrote in message
news:Xn**********************@127.0.0.1...
Neil (no****@nospam.net) writes:
>Thanks. Good to know. Is there a way to run sp_refreshview against all
views, sort of as a global refresh? Or is there a feature in EM that
might
do this? Thanks.

SELECT 'EXEC sp_refreshview ' + quotename(name)
FROM sysobjects
WHERE type = 'V'

Copy result into a query window and run it.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, es****@sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...ons/books.mspx

Jun 27 '08 #5
Neil (no****@nospam.net) writes:
Thanks, Erland! Just curious, as more of a theoretical point: why, do
you suppose, SQL Server doesn't reset the metadata when a table's
structure has changed? Seems that if the table structure has changed,
the old meta data is no longer valid. So why not automatically change
it?
I think my answer to that question is that you should put this
suggestion on Connect:
http://connect.microsoft.som/SqlServer/Feedback
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, es****@sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...ons/books.mspx
Jun 27 '08 #6

"Erland Sommarskog" <es****@sommarskog.sewrote in message
news:Xn**********************@127.0.0.1...
Neil (no****@nospam.net) writes:
>Thanks, Erland! Just curious, as more of a theoretical point: why, do
you suppose, SQL Server doesn't reset the metadata when a table's
structure has changed? Seems that if the table structure has changed,
the old meta data is no longer valid. So why not automatically change
it?

I think my answer to that question is that you should put this
suggestion on Connect:
http://connect.microsoft.som/SqlServer/Feedback
Ah, so it's not a question of some deep technological mystery, but more of a
deep MS mystery. :-) Thanks!
Jun 27 '08 #7

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

8 posts views Thread by Christopher Benson-Manica | last post: by
10 posts views Thread by db2group88 | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by settyv | last post: by
2 posts views Thread by sorobor | last post: by
1 post views Thread by gcdp | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.