By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
443,534 Members | 910 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 443,534 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Updating a table with over 100 fields

P: n/a
I've a table with over 100 fields and when I update a record in ADO.NET (on
a web form), it crashed out with expression is too complex.

But it works for adding a new record. It also works with ADO in VB6. This is
definitely a bug (since .NET 1.0) if it works for add but not update.

I know some responses will be to split the table - but just assume that it
cannot be normalise.

Any help greatly appreciated.

TIA
Young
Nov 21 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
4 Replies


P: n/a
"zMisc" <yo********@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xi*******************@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
I've a table with over 100 fields and when I update a record in ADO.NET
(on a web form), it crashed out with expression is too complex.


Sounds like you're building up dynamic SQL. If so, create a parameterised
stored procedure instead, and pass the values in through a Parameters
collection.
Nov 21 '05 #2

P: n/a
Young,
But it works for adding a new record. It also works with ADO in VB6. This
is definitely a bug (since .NET 1.0) if it works for add but not update.

Are you really thinking that you are the only one who is updating in the
world using VSNet.

Cor
Nov 21 '05 #3

P: n/a
Can you post the code that demonstrates the problem?

--
Scott
http://www.OdeToCode.com/blogs/scott/

On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 04:51:03 GMT, "zMisc" <yo********@hotmail.com>
wrote:
I've a table with over 100 fields and when I update a record in ADO.NET (on
a web form), it crashed out with expression is too complex.

But it works for adding a new record. It also works with ADO in VB6. This is
definitely a bug (since .NET 1.0) if it works for add but not update.

I know some responses will be to split the table - but just assume that it
cannot be normalise.

Any help greatly appreciated.

TIA
Young


Nov 21 '05 #4

P: n/a
I had the same issue, and decided to refine my record structures. I
tend to save 100 textfield forms into one single field with a lookup
key, and possibly some summary fields . [In Oracle I use the clob data
type.]. This type of system works great and is amazingly efficient. I
wrote a system that stores contractor invoives for my company that
stores thousands of records a month with this system and it has been
amazingly responsive. In some cases I additionally add in summary
columns that allow me to quickly calculate numbers for various reports
that would otherwise have to dig into these larger rows of data.

The down fall is that it takes programmed systems to get at the details
within these compressed fields....

-Peter

Nov 21 '05 #5

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.