Multiple groupings in table details row

Is there a way to have multiple groupings for a single dataset in a table's
detail row? I need to be able to hide individual grouped data, but still
need to see the hidden data aggregated in the footer row of the table.
The purpose is to make the report easy to read for troubleshooting by hiding
issues that aren't that important but still need to be calculated. Any help
would be greatly appreciated.No
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"joelnbtx" <joelnbtx@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9783877A-C8AA-4E51-A49F-4EB1D6CC2463@.microsoft.com...
> Is there a way to have multiple groupings for a single dataset in a
> table's
> detail row? I need to be able to hide individual grouped data, but still
> need to see the hidden data aggregated in the footer row of the table.
> The purpose is to make the report easy to read for troubleshooting by
> hiding
> issues that aren't that important but still need to be calculated. Any
> help
> would be greatly appreciated.sql

Multiple Foreign Keys

I am constructing a db in sql server 2000 that will score cross-country running meets. I have an individual results table that needs to only contain participants that are entered as participants but are specific to a certain race as well. Can I have this table be linked back to TWO other tables via the PK-FK relationship and what issues might I have doing that?

Thanks!yes, you can, and no, there won't be any|||Hai rudy,

If i link a column in one table (say table A) with columns in two different tables(say B and C) using foreign key relation ship, does the columns in both those tables(B and C) should be of the same datatype..?

Thnks in advance|||for the sake of efficiency, i think they should be, however, i have no idea if you can actually link the same column in one table to two different other tables

why don't you try it and see if it works? let us know, thanks|||Thnks rudy, i will try it and let u know what happened...|||I think this is the setup you want. [RaceParticipant] is linked back to [Participant] by a ParticipantID, and to [Race] by a RaceID. ParticipantID and RaceID do not need to be the same datatype, but ParticipantID should be the same datatype in both the [Participant] and [RaceParticipant] tables, and [RaceID] should be the same datatype in both the [Participant] and [RaceParticipant] tables.

...[Participant]\
................[RaceParticipant]
.........[Race]/sql

Multiple Clusters with shared passive nodes

Is it possible to take 5 servers and make 4 individual clusters and
share the 5th server amongst all of them as the failover node? These
clusters would be running SQL 2000 and attached to a SAN enviroment.
Sort of - I'd create all 5 servers as members of a single cluster, then
set up 4 instances of SQL Server with cluster server member 1 configured
to be able to run instance 1, member 2 to run instance 2, member 3 to
run instance 3, member 4 to run instance 4, and member 5 to run
instances 1 2 3 and 4.
While you are able to have cluster member 5 be the failover for all the
other instances, there might be a better way to set which member servers
can run each instance, but its not difficult to change this at a later
date - it might not be an optimal configuration if all the instances are
of different memory needs or if you want to handle a situation where
more than one cluster member might be unavailable at a time.
Good luck,
Tony Sebion
"onefastmustang" <onefastmustang@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128006737.120461.270030@.g49g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com:

> Is it possible to take 5 servers and make 4 individual clusters and
> share the 5th server amongst all of them as the failover node? These
> clusters would be running SQL 2000 and attached to a SAN enviroment.
|||So in this architecture then I take it that each instance of SQL will
have to be in its own cluster group right?
So in cluster administrator I would have SQL1 Group, SQL2 Group, SQL3
Group and SQL4 Group? Each with its own SQL IP address and its own
drives? But also have a main Cluster Group that contains the Quorum
drive and Cluster management IP?
Thanks
|||Yup, that's exactly what I was thinking.
Tony
"onefastmustang" <onefastmustang@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128010958.220046.38020@.g14g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com:

> So in this architecture then I take it that each instance of SQL will
> have to be in its own cluster group right?
> So in cluster administrator I would have SQL1 Group, SQL2 Group, SQL3
> Group and SQL4 Group? Each with its own SQL IP address and its own
> drives? But also have a main Cluster Group that contains the Quorum
> drive and Cluster management IP?
> Thanks
|||There are a couple of Got'chas. What Tony is referring to is called a
"Round Robin" multi-instanced cluster. The one you described is referred to
as an "N + I" multi-instanced cluster. Both are supported; however, only
SS2K 64-bit allows more than 4 nodes in a SQL Server cluster. Windows 2K
Advanced Server only allows 2-node clusters. 2K Datacenter Edition supports
4-node clusters. Both Windows 2K3 Enterprise and Datacenter Editions
support 8-node clusters, but 32-bit SQL Server 2K does not unless the you
use the IA-64 edition.
PRB: Virtual SQL Server 2000 installation fails on cluster that has eight
nodes
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;811054
Windows Server 2003 Server Cluster Architecture
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...ercluster.mspx
Good luck.
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas

"Tony Sebion" <tony@.sebion.com> wrote in message
news:3q2j44Fctu5kU1@.individual.net...
Yup, that's exactly what I was thinking.
Tony
"onefastmustang" <onefastmustang@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128010958.220046.38020@.g14g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com:

> So in this architecture then I take it that each instance of SQL will
> have to be in its own cluster group right?
> So in cluster administrator I would have SQL1 Group, SQL2 Group, SQL3
> Group and SQL4 Group? Each with its own SQL IP address and its own
> drives? But also have a main Cluster Group that contains the Quorum
> drive and Cluster management IP?
> Thanks