i have a report that calls several subreports. I had everything working fine
until I added a page footer to the main report. All I put in it was a small
textbox that is going to hold page numbers...
Anybody know why its page breaking? I hope it has nothing to do with the
implicit keep together when calling subreports...
Let me know if anybody has any ideas.. I've tried many things an nothing
works..
JoshuaThe length of the page exceeds the page size so it "page breaks" so try
checking the length of the page and the page you selected say A4 former
should be always less than later otherwise page break occurs.
Amarnath
"gdjoshua" wrote:
> i have a report that calls several subreports. I had everything working fine
> until I added a page footer to the main report. All I put in it was a small
> textbox that is going to hold page numbers...
> Anybody know why its page breaking? I hope it has nothing to do with the
> implicit keep together when calling subreports...
> Let me know if anybody has any ideas.. I've tried many things an nothing
> works..
> Joshua|||Not quite sure I understand what your saying... My main report in the
designer fits within the margins I have set up...
Explain further...
"Amarnath" wrote:
> The length of the page exceeds the page size so it "page breaks" so try
> checking the length of the page and the page you selected say A4 former
> should be always less than later otherwise page break occurs.
> Amarnath
> "gdjoshua" wrote:
> > i have a report that calls several subreports. I had everything working fine
> > until I added a page footer to the main report. All I put in it was a small
> > textbox that is going to hold page numbers...
> >
> > Anybody know why its page breaking? I hope it has nothing to do with the
> > implicit keep together when calling subreports...
> >
> > Let me know if anybody has any ideas.. I've tried many things an nothing
> > works..
> >
> > Joshua
Showing posts with label pages. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pages. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Saturday, February 25, 2012
"Next Page" is extremely slow - like it's requerying
I have a report with a single dataset, 3-levels of table grouping, and
returns 5 pages. When I preview the report in VStudio, it returns the 5
pages and I can navigate the pages real quickly. The problem is, when I run
it online via the RS front-end and click "Next Page," it takes a good 30
seconds to load the subsequent page or pages. The query itself runs in about
45 seconds, but why is the paging not near instantaneous?
Thanks,
jI hope you must have asked some questions yourself like
1. Is this report is slow or all the reports are slow?
2. Is your dev environment and production is different then how fast is your
production machine, is the machine slow (database server)?
3. Is Cache enabled/disabled ?
4. Are you doing the dev and online chking on the same machine ?
Probabily you can go to configuration from RS manager screen and check for
the cache options.
Amarnath
"Jordan" wrote:
> I have a report with a single dataset, 3-levels of table grouping, and
> returns 5 pages. When I preview the report in VStudio, it returns the 5
> pages and I can navigate the pages real quickly. The problem is, when I run
> it online via the RS front-end and click "Next Page," it takes a good 30
> seconds to load the subsequent page or pages. The query itself runs in about
> 45 seconds, but why is the paging not near instantaneous?
> Thanks,
> j
>
>|||Absolutely.
1. This report is slow. All the other reports paginate just fine, even those
that use the same datasources.
2. It's a production machine.
3. It's not caching a temporary copy, but neither is any of the other
reports. I set the caching (every 10 minutes) and it's 99% faster, but I
still don't understand. The report shouldn't refresh itself on every page,
only every time it is run.
4. Yes. Would this really matter?
Thanks,
j
"Amarnath" <Amarnath@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DC42BC35-CD2A-42EB-BADA-E7FA77FCCA5F@.microsoft.com...
>I hope you must have asked some questions yourself like
> 1. Is this report is slow or all the reports are slow?
> 2. Is your dev environment and production is different then how fast is
> your
> production machine, is the machine slow (database server)?
> 3. Is Cache enabled/disabled ?
> 4. Are you doing the dev and online chking on the same machine ?
> Probabily you can go to configuration from RS manager screen and check for
> the cache options.
> Amarnath
> "Jordan" wrote:
>> I have a report with a single dataset, 3-levels of table grouping, and
>> returns 5 pages. When I preview the report in VStudio, it returns the 5
>> pages and I can navigate the pages real quickly. The problem is, when I
>> run
>> it online via the RS front-end and click "Next Page," it takes a good 30
>> seconds to load the subsequent page or pages. The query itself runs in
>> about
>> 45 seconds, but why is the paging not near instantaneous?
>> Thanks,
>> j
>>|||Absolutely.
1. This report is slow. All the other reports paginate just fine, even those
that use the same datasources.
2. It's a production machine.
3. It's not caching a temporary copy, but neither is any of the other
reports. I set the caching (every 10 minutes) and it's 99% faster, but I
still don't understand. The report shouldn't refresh itself on every page,
only every time it is run.
4. Yes. Would this really matter?
Thanks,
j
returns 5 pages. When I preview the report in VStudio, it returns the 5
pages and I can navigate the pages real quickly. The problem is, when I run
it online via the RS front-end and click "Next Page," it takes a good 30
seconds to load the subsequent page or pages. The query itself runs in about
45 seconds, but why is the paging not near instantaneous?
Thanks,
jI hope you must have asked some questions yourself like
1. Is this report is slow or all the reports are slow?
2. Is your dev environment and production is different then how fast is your
production machine, is the machine slow (database server)?
3. Is Cache enabled/disabled ?
4. Are you doing the dev and online chking on the same machine ?
Probabily you can go to configuration from RS manager screen and check for
the cache options.
Amarnath
"Jordan" wrote:
> I have a report with a single dataset, 3-levels of table grouping, and
> returns 5 pages. When I preview the report in VStudio, it returns the 5
> pages and I can navigate the pages real quickly. The problem is, when I run
> it online via the RS front-end and click "Next Page," it takes a good 30
> seconds to load the subsequent page or pages. The query itself runs in about
> 45 seconds, but why is the paging not near instantaneous?
> Thanks,
> j
>
>|||Absolutely.
1. This report is slow. All the other reports paginate just fine, even those
that use the same datasources.
2. It's a production machine.
3. It's not caching a temporary copy, but neither is any of the other
reports. I set the caching (every 10 minutes) and it's 99% faster, but I
still don't understand. The report shouldn't refresh itself on every page,
only every time it is run.
4. Yes. Would this really matter?
Thanks,
j
"Amarnath" <Amarnath@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DC42BC35-CD2A-42EB-BADA-E7FA77FCCA5F@.microsoft.com...
>I hope you must have asked some questions yourself like
> 1. Is this report is slow or all the reports are slow?
> 2. Is your dev environment and production is different then how fast is
> your
> production machine, is the machine slow (database server)?
> 3. Is Cache enabled/disabled ?
> 4. Are you doing the dev and online chking on the same machine ?
> Probabily you can go to configuration from RS manager screen and check for
> the cache options.
> Amarnath
> "Jordan" wrote:
>> I have a report with a single dataset, 3-levels of table grouping, and
>> returns 5 pages. When I preview the report in VStudio, it returns the 5
>> pages and I can navigate the pages real quickly. The problem is, when I
>> run
>> it online via the RS front-end and click "Next Page," it takes a good 30
>> seconds to load the subsequent page or pages. The query itself runs in
>> about
>> 45 seconds, but why is the paging not near instantaneous?
>> Thanks,
>> j
>>|||Absolutely.
1. This report is slow. All the other reports paginate just fine, even those
that use the same datasources.
2. It's a production machine.
3. It's not caching a temporary copy, but neither is any of the other
reports. I set the caching (every 10 minutes) and it's 99% faster, but I
still don't understand. The report shouldn't refresh itself on every page,
only every time it is run.
4. Yes. Would this really matter?
Thanks,
j
"Lock Pages in Memory" Service Account and SQL Agent
Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
currently)
I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?Perhaps you are talking about this on BOL
"Although it is not required, we recommend locking pages in memory when
using 64-bit operating systems. For 32-bit operating systems, Lock pages in
memory permission must be granted before AWE is configured for SQL Server."
I do not see why there could be a conflict if both services are using the
same Windows account and this account has the Lock pages in memory permission
granted. It should be Ok.
(BOL note from
Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical Memory
ms-help://MS.SQLCC.v9/MS.SQLSVR.v9.en/udb9/html/34950321-2bfd-4679-8f1b-0a0a440eb443.htm
)
Hope this helps,
Ben Nevarez
"Neufusion" wrote:
> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
> currently)
> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?
>|||The main SQL Server service is specifically designed for managing large
amounts of memory and has an option to use AWE but the SQL Agent only works
like any other regular program as far as memory management's concerned
(Virtual Memory). Therefore there's no reason to think both services would
make large AWE allocations at startup.
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
http://blogs.sqlserver.org.au/blogs/greg_linwood
Benchmark your query performance
http://www.SQLBenchmarkPro.com
"Neufusion" <mikeymiller@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9a4a6b46-f949-4c38-a277-9757134c0714@.d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
> currently)
> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?|||If I remember correctly, the "Lock pages in memory" setting only applies to
Enterprise, not Standard edition. not sure which you are running
--
Kevin3NF
SQL Server dude
You want fries with that?
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
"Neufusion" <mikeymiller@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9a4a6b46-f949-4c38-a277-9757134c0714@.d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
> currently)
> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?|||This was true for SQL 2000 but not SQL 2005
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
http://blogs.sqlserver.org.au/blogs/greg_linwood
Benchmark your query performance
http://www.SQLBenchmarkPro.com
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:Oh8WQgnYIHA.3964@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> If I remember correctly, the "Lock pages in memory" setting only applies
> to Enterprise, not Standard edition. not sure which you are running
> --
> Kevin3NF
> SQL Server dude
> You want fries with that?
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
> I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
> Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
>
> "Neufusion" <mikeymiller@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9a4a6b46-f949-4c38-a277-9757134c0714@.d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
>> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
>> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
>> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
>> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
>> currently)
>> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
>> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?
>|||http://support.microsoft.com/kb/918483/en-us
Note For 64-bit systems, SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition is the only
edition that is designed to use lock pages in memory.
Am I misreading? I have a 3 node, 2 instance cluster my customer is about
to upgrade for this very reason...
--
Kevin3NF
SQL Server dude
You want fries with that?
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
"Greg Linwood" <g_linwood@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:utExsLrYIHA.4196@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> This was true for SQL 2000 but not SQL 2005
> Regards,
> Greg Linwood
> SQL Server MVP
> http://blogs.sqlserver.org.au/blogs/greg_linwood
> Benchmark your query performance
> http://www.SQLBenchmarkPro.com
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:Oh8WQgnYIHA.3964@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> If I remember correctly, the "Lock pages in memory" setting only applies
>> to Enterprise, not Standard edition. not sure which you are running
>> --
>> Kevin3NF
>> SQL Server dude
>> You want fries with that?
>> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
>> I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
>> Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
>>
>> "Neufusion" <mikeymiller@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:9a4a6b46-f949-4c38-a277-9757134c0714@.d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
>> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
>> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
>> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
>> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
>> currently)
>> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
>> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?
>>
>
Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
currently)
I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?Perhaps you are talking about this on BOL
"Although it is not required, we recommend locking pages in memory when
using 64-bit operating systems. For 32-bit operating systems, Lock pages in
memory permission must be granted before AWE is configured for SQL Server."
I do not see why there could be a conflict if both services are using the
same Windows account and this account has the Lock pages in memory permission
granted. It should be Ok.
(BOL note from
Enabling Memory Support for Over 4 GB of Physical Memory
ms-help://MS.SQLCC.v9/MS.SQLSVR.v9.en/udb9/html/34950321-2bfd-4679-8f1b-0a0a440eb443.htm
)
Hope this helps,
Ben Nevarez
"Neufusion" wrote:
> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
> currently)
> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?
>|||The main SQL Server service is specifically designed for managing large
amounts of memory and has an option to use AWE but the SQL Agent only works
like any other regular program as far as memory management's concerned
(Virtual Memory). Therefore there's no reason to think both services would
make large AWE allocations at startup.
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
http://blogs.sqlserver.org.au/blogs/greg_linwood
Benchmark your query performance
http://www.SQLBenchmarkPro.com
"Neufusion" <mikeymiller@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9a4a6b46-f949-4c38-a277-9757134c0714@.d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
> currently)
> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?|||If I remember correctly, the "Lock pages in memory" setting only applies to
Enterprise, not Standard edition. not sure which you are running
--
Kevin3NF
SQL Server dude
You want fries with that?
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
"Neufusion" <mikeymiller@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9a4a6b46-f949-4c38-a277-9757134c0714@.d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
> currently)
> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?|||This was true for SQL 2000 but not SQL 2005
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
http://blogs.sqlserver.org.au/blogs/greg_linwood
Benchmark your query performance
http://www.SQLBenchmarkPro.com
"Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
news:Oh8WQgnYIHA.3964@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> If I remember correctly, the "Lock pages in memory" setting only applies
> to Enterprise, not Standard edition. not sure which you are running
> --
> Kevin3NF
> SQL Server dude
> You want fries with that?
> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
> I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
> Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
>
> "Neufusion" <mikeymiller@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9a4a6b46-f949-4c38-a277-9757134c0714@.d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
>> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
>> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
>> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
>> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
>> currently)
>> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
>> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?
>|||http://support.microsoft.com/kb/918483/en-us
Note For 64-bit systems, SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition is the only
edition that is designed to use lock pages in memory.
Am I misreading? I have a 3 node, 2 instance cluster my customer is about
to upgrade for this very reason...
--
Kevin3NF
SQL Server dude
You want fries with that?
http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
"Greg Linwood" <g_linwood@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:utExsLrYIHA.4196@.TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> This was true for SQL 2000 but not SQL 2005
> Regards,
> Greg Linwood
> SQL Server MVP
> http://blogs.sqlserver.org.au/blogs/greg_linwood
> Benchmark your query performance
> http://www.SQLBenchmarkPro.com
> "Kevin3NF" <kevin@.SPAMTRAP.3nf-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:Oh8WQgnYIHA.3964@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> If I remember correctly, the "Lock pages in memory" setting only applies
>> to Enterprise, not Standard edition. not sure which you are running
>> --
>> Kevin3NF
>> SQL Server dude
>> You want fries with that?
>> http://kevin3nf.blogspot.com/
>> I only check the newsgroups during work hours, M-F.
>> Hit my blog and the contact links if necessary...I may be available.
>>
>> "Neufusion" <mikeymiller@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:9a4a6b46-f949-4c38-a277-9757134c0714@.d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> Microsoft recommends using the Lock Pages in Memory privilege for SQl
>> Server 2005 x64 running on Windows Server 2003 R2 x64.
>> If granting this privilege allows this user to Lock Pages in Memory,
>> should SQL Agent be changed to use a different service account that
>> does not have this privilege? (both SQL and Agent use the same account
>> currently)
>> I am thinking that if both SQL Server and SQL Agent are running under
>> a account with this privilege if they will conflict. Is this the case?
>>
>
Saturday, February 11, 2012
"Continued" Header on Subsequent Pages
Hi,
Chris Hays has an interesting blog on how to get a "continued ..." header on
subsequent pages:
http://blogs.msdn.com/chrishays/archive/2006/09/27/ContinuedHeader.aspx
However, this seems to only work in your browser. Whenever you want to print
or export to PDF, it is not shown in every page header, just on the pages
where it was shown in the browser. ( browser page has less page breaks than
PDF page )
Is there a solution to this problem (I want to repeat the header on every
printed page)?
Thank you very much!Nobody?
"Steven" wrote:
> Hi,
> Chris Hays has an interesting blog on how to get a "continued ..." header on
> subsequent pages:
> http://blogs.msdn.com/chrishays/archive/2006/09/27/ContinuedHeader.aspx
> However, this seems to only work in your browser. Whenever you want to print
> or export to PDF, it is not shown in every page header, just on the pages
> where it was shown in the browser. ( browser page has less page breaks than
> PDF page )
> Is there a solution to this problem (I want to repeat the header on every
> printed page)?
> Thank you very much!
Chris Hays has an interesting blog on how to get a "continued ..." header on
subsequent pages:
http://blogs.msdn.com/chrishays/archive/2006/09/27/ContinuedHeader.aspx
However, this seems to only work in your browser. Whenever you want to print
or export to PDF, it is not shown in every page header, just on the pages
where it was shown in the browser. ( browser page has less page breaks than
PDF page )
Is there a solution to this problem (I want to repeat the header on every
printed page)?
Thank you very much!Nobody?
"Steven" wrote:
> Hi,
> Chris Hays has an interesting blog on how to get a "continued ..." header on
> subsequent pages:
> http://blogs.msdn.com/chrishays/archive/2006/09/27/ContinuedHeader.aspx
> However, this seems to only work in your browser. Whenever you want to print
> or export to PDF, it is not shown in every page header, just on the pages
> where it was shown in the browser. ( browser page has less page breaks than
> PDF page )
> Is there a solution to this problem (I want to repeat the header on every
> printed page)?
> Thank you very much!
Thursday, February 9, 2012
"Balance Carried Forward" / "Balance Brought Forward"
I have a statement report. There is a table which contains the statement
line details. The printout of this may last several pages. Assume it lasts n
pages.
The bottom of page1 should show the total debits and total credits for page
1 only.
The bottom of page 2 should show the total debits and credits for page 1 and
2 only e.t.c.
I found I cant add Globals!PageNumber as a group to the table.
Neither am I allowed to put the data field in the page footer.
I thought RunningValue function might do it, but this always prints the
grand total for all pages.
Help !
Thanks
Chris BrooksbankPagination and aggregation (I suspect) are in unrelated parts of the RS
code..(I think all of the aggregation stuff is done prior to pagination).
There are no page totals kinds of functions that I am aware of..
Probably the best you can do is to create small groupings, so that a group
will never be larger than a page and total at the group level...
Unless one of the dev guys has a suggestion.
--
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"Chris Brooksbank" <NoSpam@.Ta.com> wrote in message
news:OR2sIiBZEHA.2408@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> I have a statement report. There is a table which contains the statement
> line details. The printout of this may last several pages. Assume it lasts
n
> pages.
> The bottom of page1 should show the total debits and total credits for
page
> 1 only.
> The bottom of page 2 should show the total debits and credits for page 1
and
> 2 only e.t.c.
> I found I cant add Globals!PageNumber as a group to the table.
> Neither am I allowed to put the data field in the page footer.
> I thought RunningValue function might do it, but this always prints the
> grand total for all pages.
> Help !
> Thanks
> Chris Brooksbank
>
line details. The printout of this may last several pages. Assume it lasts n
pages.
The bottom of page1 should show the total debits and total credits for page
1 only.
The bottom of page 2 should show the total debits and credits for page 1 and
2 only e.t.c.
I found I cant add Globals!PageNumber as a group to the table.
Neither am I allowed to put the data field in the page footer.
I thought RunningValue function might do it, but this always prints the
grand total for all pages.
Help !
Thanks
Chris BrooksbankPagination and aggregation (I suspect) are in unrelated parts of the RS
code..(I think all of the aggregation stuff is done prior to pagination).
There are no page totals kinds of functions that I am aware of..
Probably the best you can do is to create small groupings, so that a group
will never be larger than a page and total at the group level...
Unless one of the dev guys has a suggestion.
--
Wayne Snyder, MCDBA, SQL Server MVP
Mariner, Charlotte, NC
www.mariner-usa.com
(Please respond only to the newsgroups.)
I support the Professional Association of SQL Server (PASS) and it's
community of SQL Server professionals.
www.sqlpass.org
"Chris Brooksbank" <NoSpam@.Ta.com> wrote in message
news:OR2sIiBZEHA.2408@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> I have a statement report. There is a table which contains the statement
> line details. The printout of this may last several pages. Assume it lasts
n
> pages.
> The bottom of page1 should show the total debits and total credits for
page
> 1 only.
> The bottom of page 2 should show the total debits and credits for page 1
and
> 2 only e.t.c.
> I found I cant add Globals!PageNumber as a group to the table.
> Neither am I allowed to put the data field in the page footer.
> I thought RunningValue function might do it, but this always prints the
> grand total for all pages.
> Help !
> Thanks
> Chris Brooksbank
>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
