Asynchronous / non-blocking trigger

Is it possible to create an asynchronous / non-blocking trigger in SQL
Server 2005 that will allow operations to continue asynchronously while the
trigger can still read the in-memory "inserted" and "deleted" virtual
tables?
Thanks,
Jon
Triggers always execute synchronously in the context of a transaction. If
you need to invoke an asynchronous process from within a trigger, consider
using Service Broker. Asynchronous triggers are exactly the functionality
that Service Broker provides. See the Books Online for details.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Jon Davis" <jon@.REMOVE.ME.PLEASE.jondavis.net> wrote in message
news:%23jWadvEjHHA.4552@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Is it possible to create an asynchronous / non-blocking trigger in SQL
> Server 2005 that will allow operations to continue asynchronously while
> the trigger can still read the in-memory "inserted" and "deleted" virtual
> tables?
> Thanks,
> Jon
>
|||So, then, no, because Service Broker doesn't retain the "inserted" and
"deleted" in-memory tables.
Thanks anyway.
Jon
"Dan Guzman" <guzmanda@.nospam-online.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:5D57525F-1DED-4A3B-B00B-60342A369F5A@.microsoft.com...
> Triggers always execute synchronously in the context of a transaction. If
> you need to invoke an asynchronous process from within a trigger, consider
> using Service Broker. Asynchronous triggers are exactly the functionality
> that Service Broker provides. See the Books Online for details.
>
> --
> Hope this helps.
> Dan Guzman
> SQL Server MVP
> "Jon Davis" <jon@.REMOVE.ME.PLEASE.jondavis.net> wrote in message
> news:%23jWadvEjHHA.4552@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
|||> So, then, no, because Service Broker doesn't retain the "inserted" and
> "deleted" in-memory tables.
Service Broker doesn't need access to inserted/deleted directly. The
trigger can pass insert data into the SB queue the from the inserted/deleted
pseudo tables. Here's an example:
http://www.dotnetfun.com/articles/sql/sql2005/SQL2005CreatingTSQLAsynchronousTriggers.aspx
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Jon Davis" <jon@.REMOVE.ME.PLEASE.jondavis.net> wrote in message
news:e3kWlPNjHHA.4520@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> So, then, no, because Service Broker doesn't retain the "inserted" and
> "deleted" in-memory tables.
> Thanks anyway.
> Jon
> "Dan Guzman" <guzmanda@.nospam-online.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:5D57525F-1DED-4A3B-B00B-60342A369F5A@.microsoft.com...
>

Asynchronous / non-blocking trigger

Is it possible to create an asynchronous / non-blocking trigger in SQL
Server 2005 that will allow operations to continue asynchronously while the
trigger can still read the in-memory "inserted" and "deleted" virtual
tables?
Thanks,
JonTriggers always execute synchronously in the context of a transaction. If
you need to invoke an asynchronous process from within a trigger, consider
using Service Broker. Asynchronous triggers are exactly the functionality
that Service Broker provides. See the Books Online for details.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Jon Davis" <jon@.REMOVE.ME.PLEASE.jondavis.net> wrote in message
news:%23jWadvEjHHA.4552@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Is it possible to create an asynchronous / non-blocking trigger in SQL
> Server 2005 that will allow operations to continue asynchronously while
> the trigger can still read the in-memory "inserted" and "deleted" virtual
> tables?
> Thanks,
> Jon
>|||So, then, no, because Service Broker doesn't retain the "inserted" and
"deleted" in-memory tables.
Thanks anyway. :)
Jon
"Dan Guzman" <guzmanda@.nospam-online.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:5D57525F-1DED-4A3B-B00B-60342A369F5A@.microsoft.com...
> Triggers always execute synchronously in the context of a transaction. If
> you need to invoke an asynchronous process from within a trigger, consider
> using Service Broker. Asynchronous triggers are exactly the functionality
> that Service Broker provides. See the Books Online for details.
>
> --
> Hope this helps.
> Dan Guzman
> SQL Server MVP
> "Jon Davis" <jon@.REMOVE.ME.PLEASE.jondavis.net> wrote in message
> news:%23jWadvEjHHA.4552@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Is it possible to create an asynchronous / non-blocking trigger in SQL
>> Server 2005 that will allow operations to continue asynchronously while
>> the trigger can still read the in-memory "inserted" and "deleted" virtual
>> tables?
>> Thanks,
>> Jon
>|||> So, then, no, because Service Broker doesn't retain the "inserted" and
> "deleted" in-memory tables.
Service Broker doesn't need access to inserted/deleted directly. The
trigger can pass insert data into the SB queue the from the inserted/deleted
pseudo tables. Here's an example:
http://www.dotnetfun.com/articles/sql/sql2005/SQL2005CreatingTSQLAsynchronousTriggers.aspx
--
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Jon Davis" <jon@.REMOVE.ME.PLEASE.jondavis.net> wrote in message
news:e3kWlPNjHHA.4520@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> So, then, no, because Service Broker doesn't retain the "inserted" and
> "deleted" in-memory tables.
> Thanks anyway. :)
> Jon
> "Dan Guzman" <guzmanda@.nospam-online.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:5D57525F-1DED-4A3B-B00B-60342A369F5A@.microsoft.com...
>> Triggers always execute synchronously in the context of a transaction.
>> If you need to invoke an asynchronous process from within a trigger,
>> consider using Service Broker. Asynchronous triggers are exactly the
>> functionality that Service Broker provides. See the Books Online for
>> details.
>>
>> --
>> Hope this helps.
>> Dan Guzman
>> SQL Server MVP
>> "Jon Davis" <jon@.REMOVE.ME.PLEASE.jondavis.net> wrote in message
>> news:%23jWadvEjHHA.4552@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Is it possible to create an asynchronous / non-blocking trigger in SQL
>> Server 2005 that will allow operations to continue asynchronously while
>> the trigger can still read the in-memory "inserted" and "deleted"
>> virtual tables?
>> Thanks,
>> Jon
>>
>

Asynchronous / non-blocking trigger

Is it possible to create an asynchronous / non-blocking trigger in SQL
Server 2005 that will allow operations to continue asynchronously while the
trigger can still read the in-memory "inserted" and "deleted" virtual
tables?
Thanks,
JonTriggers always execute synchronously in the context of a transaction. If
you need to invoke an asynchronous process from within a trigger, consider
using Service Broker. Asynchronous triggers are exactly the functionality
that Service Broker provides. See the Books Online for details.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Jon Davis" <jon@.REMOVE.ME.PLEASE.jondavis.net> wrote in message
news:%23jWadvEjHHA.4552@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Is it possible to create an asynchronous / non-blocking trigger in SQL
> Server 2005 that will allow operations to continue asynchronously while
> the trigger can still read the in-memory "inserted" and "deleted" virtual
> tables?
> Thanks,
> Jon
>|||So, then, no, because Service Broker doesn't retain the "inserted" and
"deleted" in-memory tables.
Thanks anyway.
Jon
"Dan Guzman" <guzmanda@.nospam-online.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:5D57525F-1DED-4A3B-B00B-60342A369F5A@.microsoft.com...
> Triggers always execute synchronously in the context of a transaction. If
> you need to invoke an asynchronous process from within a trigger, consider
> using Service Broker. Asynchronous triggers are exactly the functionality
> that Service Broker provides. See the Books Online for details.
>
> --
> Hope this helps.
> Dan Guzman
> SQL Server MVP
> "Jon Davis" <jon@.REMOVE.ME.PLEASE.jondavis.net> wrote in message
> news:%23jWadvEjHHA.4552@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>|||> So, then, no, because Service Broker doesn't retain the "inserted" and
> "deleted" in-memory tables.
Service Broker doesn't need access to inserted/deleted directly. The
trigger can pass insert data into the SB queue the from the inserted/deleted
pseudo tables. Here's an example:
http://www.dotnetfun.com/articles/s...br />
ers.aspx
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Jon Davis" <jon@.REMOVE.ME.PLEASE.jondavis.net> wrote in message
news:e3kWlPNjHHA.4520@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> So, then, no, because Service Broker doesn't retain the "inserted" and
> "deleted" in-memory tables.
> Thanks anyway.
> Jon
> "Dan Guzman" <guzmanda@.nospam-online.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:5D57525F-1DED-4A3B-B00B-60342A369F5A@.microsoft.com...
>

ASPNETDB.MDF & SQL Server

When I first sign up with Visual Web Developer, Do I continue to use this database ASPNETDB.MDF or do I need to connect to the Microsoft SQL Server Database? Does Visual Web Developer Express automaticaliyy connect to SQL Server Express Edition?

Thanks

Computergirl

SQL Express only allows a single connection, and no hosting company are using this version. It depend on what your purpose, if it's only for self learning, then it's OK.

Visual Web Developer Express does not automatically connect to SQL Express.

More info on how to setup the connection string:http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms247257(VS.80).aspx