My client has an app that calls a db stored proc (A), which includes calls to other stored procs (B and C). Stored proc C creates records, and I need to see the SQL calls the database receives to create those records, but when I run SQL profiler, I only see the original call to Proc A. Is this an inherent limitation of the Profiler utility (a proc called by a proc is not visible via a trace,) or did the original developer "hide" the visibility of that proc with a setting I need to uncover.
Please help!
2007-01-17 11:41:42 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Computers & Internet ➔ Programming & Design
Yes you can view that information in SQL Profiler. The events that you need to add to the trace are:
SP:StmtStarting
SP:StmtCompleted
This will show you each command that is being executed in the order that it's being executed within SQL Profiler.
2007-01-19 14:33:46 · answer #1 · answered by mrdenny 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's a problem with profiler. If you have access to the proc and a place to test it, modify the calling proc so that it prints the parameters that are used to call the other procs. I usually create a new proc with a different name and put the debugging statements inside.
2007-01-17 11:51:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yeah profiler only receives the calls that are passed into the servers listening socket on port 1433. So it is not actually showing the database processing that is going on. I would suggest running the stored procedures in Query Analyzer and individually to see what you get back.
Hope that helps
RJ
2007-01-19 06:27:58 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
actually it fairly is extremely elementary to keep archives in database, fantastically in case the place you do not % the webserver to duplicate each record upon backup in case you have a extensive ammount of them. It has income if the archives are actually not replaced continuously, it provide you greater administration, deleting a record is purely removing a record from the db. you ought to use the Binary container in mssql server to keep them, as an occasion, in case you % to keep txt record in database, you may first convert the record into Byte, then keep the resultant Byte interior the Binary container. in case you % to keep purely the pointer to the record, purely get the whole direction of the record and positioned it right into a varchar container. wish this facilitates.
2016-10-31 09:48:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
all those B's C's and SQL's are giving me the HEE b Gee B's
2007-01-18 00:44:01 · answer #5 · answered by anissia 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋