Comments on: SQL SERVER – Restrictions of Views – T SQL View Limitations

By: Venkata Suresh Pedireddi

Venkata Suresh Pedireddi — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:30:39 +0000

“All the tables referenced by the view must be in the same database as the view.”

Can we use SYNONYM s to work with tables which are part of other database?

By: Sachin

Sachin — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 05:09:56 +0000

Is it possible to change values in a table through a view?

By: Hari

Hari — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 09:25:51 +0000

I tried update in view but I don’t understand .

Can you give me the query of update view with tables

Regards
Hari

By: Nooging

Nooging — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 05:14:22 +0000

@sarala – Basically, views allow us to create like a “virtual” table representing the data in one or more tables in an alternative way.

Note that this is NOT my definition but that based on the T-SQL command CREATE VIEW in msdn.com.

But it’s a good simple description.

They can be quite handy when say we don’t want to create further tables but would like to see a combination of selected data/fields in the same place :).

By: sarala

sarala — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 11:47:44 +0000

what is the use of views?

By: JP

JP — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 08:51:18 +0000

Hi Dave,

Yes it makes sense.

Thanks for your help,

Regards,

By: Pinal Dave

Pinal Dave — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 14:35:50 +0000

Hi JP,

Because “Person” is a common entity that represents all other entities like employees, suppliers, patientes.
So either create a single table Person or create saperate table for each entity like employees, suppliers, patientes. If you are create saperate table for employees, suppliers, patientes, etc then you should not create a common table “Person” because it would cause duplicacy and redundancy.

Regards,
Pinal Dave

By: JP

JP — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 08:32:25 +0000

Hi Dave,

Thanks for you reply. I don’t know if i understood your last sentence, but, does it make sense to put all the fields of the People table into Pacient table so that i dont have to do an inner join?

By: Pinal Dave

Pinal Dave — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:30:30 +0000

Hello JP,

Creating an index on the ID column of Person table would be enough to solve any performance issue that you are suspecting. Otherwise partitioning is the way of least overhead to horizontly split this table.

Regards,
Pinal Dave

By: JP

JP — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 02:16:19 +0000

Hi,

I’m having kind of a dilema here designing my database and i would to know your opinion…

I have a table “People” where i store general info about employees, pacients, suppliers, etc… and for each entity i have a specific table that references the table “People”. And my dilema is since i will have about 2 millions of rows about pacients and every time i need they general info i will have to join with the people table that haves more or less 5 millions of rows, doest it make sense denormalize my database in this case? and have a people general info into every table that represents an entity like employees, suppliers, pacientes, … ?

the problem in that case is the data anomalies i could have an employee can in future or in present be a pacient too, and because of this i will have to validate inserts and updates…

can you advise me a better solution?

can a view in this case solve my problem?

By: manish jain

manish jain — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:30:50 +0000

I wanted to know the Limitation of the view in sql server 2005 please

By: Ewart

Ewart — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:00:42 +0000

There seem to be many errors in this article, for example:

“You can’t use ROWSET, UNION, TOP, ORDER BY, DISTINCT, COUNT(*), COMPUTE, or COMPUTE BY.”

perhaps it should be rewritten so as not to confuse..

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 21:02:00 +0000

Great article.
I think you however miss the simplistic usage for Views.
They are very good for ‘canned’ reporting.

Anyone trying to use a View to update data is missing the entire point of relational databases.

Pulling that ‘canned’ data into a DataGrid without having to code extra lines for a StoredProc…

By: David T

David T — Wed, 28 May 2008 20:46:27 +0000

Hi Dave,
do you have any idea why this error would happen?

Cannot create index on view “viewName” because function “functionName” referenced by the view performs user or system data access.

By: Elaian

Elaian — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:51:19 +0000

i have a question .

is the view more fast than the SELECT stat in the SP. ???
or both have the same performance. ???

By: SQL SERVER - Fix : ERROR : Msg 1033, Level 15, State 1 The ORDER BY clause is invalid in views, inline functions, derived tables, subqueries, and common table expressions, unless TOP or FOR XML is also specified. Journey to SQL Authority with Pina

Sun, 12 Aug 2007 15:28:47 +0000

[...] Aug 12th, 2007 by pinaldave Following error is encountered when view is attempted to created with ORDER BY clause in it. ORDER BY clause is not allowed in views in SQL Server 2005. This solution also displays the workaround to use ORDER BY in VIEW. I really do not prefer to use views. My views on SQL Views read it SQL SERVER – Restrictions of Views – T SQL View Limitations. [...]