Error : "Too many tables names"

Hi all,
 Here is my problem : we use Business Objects with data on SQL Server 6.5

Sometimes,users need to ask server to perform "big" queries with something like 18 tables names. In such case here is the error message they get :

[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]Too many table names in the query.  The maximum allowable is 16. 106

My DBA is away for few days, so does anyboy here knows how to increase this limitation of 16 table names ?

regards.

Note : points will be upgraded up to 200 pts for full working answer in less than 1 hour. :-)

Mike
gkluxAsked:
Who is Participating?
 
nigelrivettConnect With a Mentor Commented:
yes
this works for @i = 255 - fails for @i = 256 with

Too many table names in the query. The maximum allowable is 256.

set nocount on
declare @cmd varchar(8000)
select @cmd = 'select 1 from sysobjects'
declare @i int
select @i = 255
while @i > 0
begin
   select @cmd = @cmd + ',sysobjects s' + convert(varchar(10),@i)
   select @i = @i - 1
end
select @cmd = @cmd + ' where 1 = 0'
exec (@cmd)
0
 
kdg2000Commented:
Try to divide the large search into 2 nested searches.
If it is realized in the stored procedure, it Try to divide into 2 nested procedures.
0
 
gkluxAuthor Commented:
kdq2000 :
 First of all, thank for interesting in my question.
I cannot accept your answer, because what I need is to know how can I upgrade the limitation. If I do what you say, it means that each time a user make a big query, I will have to do this specially for his report. It's not the goal.

Sorry

Mike

0
Learn to develop an Android App

Want to increase your earning potential in 2018? Pad your resume with app building experience. Learn how with this hands-on course.

 
nigelrivettCommented:
Afraid there is no way.
You would normally just change the SP to use an intermediate temp table but if you give the client app control of the database structure then I don't think there is a lot you can do.
0
 
peteyhigginsCommented:
It's not about control of the database structure.  SQL Server is set up to be able to allocate only so much memory for database queries.  Having too many tables in the queries pushes this past the allowable limit, which could easily crash the entire program, so checks were put in to forbid this from happening.  It's not about having a longer wait, it's about the the db not crashing.  There is no way around this, especially in the older languages like 6.5, which didn't allow for a whole lot of user control.

If you don't want to break up the query into separate parts, the only way to do what you want is to use views.  If you know that the query will only target certain fields in the tables, create some views that each hold five or six of those fields.  Then run your database query against those views rather than against the base tables.  That might free up enough memory to let it work.
0
 
kdg2000Commented:
If it would be possible to look at query, it is possible precisely to define(determine) paths of an output(exit) from the usual situation.
0
 
gkluxAuthor Commented:
Hi all,
  I've found this in the Help file while looking ont he select statement syntax:

SELECT [ALL | DISTINCT] select_list
[INTO [new_table_name]
[FROM table_name [, table_name2 [?, table_name16]]
[WHERE clause]
[GROUP BY clause]
[HAVING clause]
[ORDER BY clause]
[COMPUTE clause]
[FOR BROWSE]]

It seems that this is a syntax restriction. does anybody knows if this restriction exists in SQL Server 7 ? And what about SQL server 2000 ?

Mike
0
 
nigelrivettCommented:
v7 can have 256 tables.
0
 
gkluxAuthor Commented:
nigelrivett : are you sure of this ?


Ekim
0
 
gkluxAuthor Commented:
thanks.

Ekim
0
All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.