http://choirulamri.org born to train, forced to code::SQL Server, SharePoint, .Net, Business Intelligence Sat, 27 Jun 2009 04:18:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 en hourly 1 http://choirulamri.org/archives/445 http://choirulamri.org/archives/445#comments Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:59:03 +0000 mca http://choirulamri.org/archives/445 http://choirulamri.org/archives/445/feed 1 http://choirulamri.org/archives/433 http://choirulamri.org/archives/433#comments Thu, 11 Jun 2009 08:20:13 +0000 mca http://choirulamri.org/archives/433 http://choirulamri.org/archives/433/feed 0 http://choirulamri.org/archives/359 http://choirulamri.org/archives/359#comments Tue, 02 Jun 2009 16:24:53 +0000 mca http://choirulamri.org/?p=359 http://choirulamri.org/archives/359/feed 0 http://choirulamri.org/archives/358 http://choirulamri.org/archives/358#comments Mon, 01 Jun 2009 16:37:31 +0000 mca http://choirulamri.org/archives/358 http://choirulamri.org/archives/358/feed 1 http://choirulamri.org/archives/417 http://choirulamri.org/archives/417#comments Sat, 30 May 2009 20:57:00 +0000 mca http://choirulamri.org/archives/417 There are several advantages of integrating SSRS with SharePoint:

• Seamless UI for end user. They do not need to jump from one screen to another to open report and SharePoint dashboard at the same time.
• All reports are deployed as document library, so it follows all SharePoint library setting. It saves lots of time instead of managing report in separate report manager.
• All reports are under SharePoint security setting, giving better consolidated administrative from SharePoint perspective
• Render reports inside web part. It makes building SharePoint dashboard faster and easier.

What do we need to configure this:

• SharePoint Services 3.0 or MOSS 2007, It’s better if upgraded to SP1 or SP2.
• SQL Server 2005 Reporting Services with SP2, or Reporting Services 2008.
• Reporting Services add-in for SharePoint. There are 2 versions of add-in: SSRS 2005 and SSRS 2008.

Configuration can be simple (all in one box) or scale up to separate boxes. Below is the logical architecture if SSRS and SharePoint are installed on separate boxes: Assuming that SharePoint already installed, below are the explanations to do integration.]]> http://choirulamri.org/archives/417/feed 0 http://choirulamri.org/archives/342 http://choirulamri.org/archives/342#comments Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:11:54 +0000 mca http://choirulamri.org/archives/342 http://choirulamri.org/archives/342/feed 0 http://choirulamri.org/archives/376 http://choirulamri.org/archives/376#comments Fri, 06 Feb 2009 19:57:39 +0000 mca http://choirulamri.org/?p=376

Save disk space, the compressed size is only around 10% of normal backup.

Faster backup time.

Faster restore time (surprise)!.

This is very convenience approach instead of doing normal backup and compress it with Winzip. According to benchmark I did, Winzip compression works slower than backup with compress on the fly. Not mention that we also have to unzip the file to restore from backup. I am also surprise because restoring compressed backup is faster than non compressed. Logically, it needs to decompress and restore so it should be slower than restoring normal one. But my benchmark showed the opposite. I modified the AdventureWorks2008 sample database and insert additional data to make it bigger. Below is my benchmark results with 900 MB size.

• Backup with no compress: 115 seconds
• Backup with compress: 49 seconds
• Restore from non compressed backup : 123 seconds
• Restore from compressed backup : 113 seconds

So, are you convinced? Here are the scripts to do compressed backup.]]> http://choirulamri.org/archives/376/feed 2 http://choirulamri.org/archives/330 http://choirulamri.org/archives/330#comments Wed, 28 Jan 2009 16:41:11 +0000 mca http://choirulamri.org/archives/330 First, prepare IIS 7 for ASP.NET component. I configured the following components in my Win 7: ]]> http://choirulamri.org/archives/330/feed 3 http://choirulamri.org/archives/369 http://choirulamri.org/archives/369#comments Sat, 03 Jan 2009 09:46:00 +0000 mca http://choirulamri.org/archives/369 Moral of the story: make sure you have automated way to manage transaction log growth. There are 2 way to shrink the log:

• Detach database, delete the big log, and re-attach without log file. SQL Server will create a new, fresh log file with minimum initial size. It is 2MB by default. Disadvantage: the database will not be available during the process. Offline duration depends on how fast is the detach – attach operation takes time.
• Better approach: use SHRINKFILE of DBCC command. This is better because I do not need to bring the system OFF.

Regardless of the approach, make sure to do full database backup. Shrinking the log deletes historical transaction that may be needed to restore database to specific point of time. Just in case, make sure to do full backup. You have been warned right :). These are the steps to shrink a huge log file:]]> http://choirulamri.org/archives/369/feed 0 http://choirulamri.org/archives/306 http://choirulamri.org/archives/306#comments Mon, 15 Dec 2008 10:54:30 +0000 mca http://choirulamri.org/archives/306 http://choirulamri.org/archives/306/feed 0