Looking at blocking on a SQL Server 2000 system sitting on Windows 2003
Server I am somtimes catching a blocker sitting with multiple locks and
a command of NOP blocking an update user looking for a exclusive key
lock.
The main question is what is NOP command in SQL Server? Of the ones
I've been able to witness, the commands that come up as NOP, during the
blocking period will change to a INSERT cmd.
This system is SQL Server 2k Enterprise on a 4 processor box with AWE
mode and 16gb of memory.
I can't find any reference to this in any documentation and I seem to
recall hearing what such a command represented at one time but can't
find it now. My feeling is that this might help me identify some
performance issues (beyond the bad code I've already identified) so it
would help to understand what causes SQL Server to post that as a
command in Sysprocesses.
thanks
NOP stands for no operation, which is a low level instruction that waits for
a specific number of cpu cycles. I am not much familiar with how it impacts
SQL server, but a quick googling suggests it may impact deadlocking, when
one process waiting for a resource held by the another process.
Anith
|||Anith Sen wrote:
> NOP stands for no operation, which is a low level instruction that waits for
> a specific number of cpu cycles. I am not much familiar with how it impacts
> SQL server, but a quick googling suggests it may impact deadlocking, when
> one process waiting for a resource held by the another process.
>
Unfortunately I can't find any information regarding SQL Server
specifically, not even in the Inside SQL Server books I've read over
time.
I'm still seeing it show up, it's not part of a deadlock as the
deadlock isn't being found by basic tracking, though what found is it's
a user creating a block. When I first catch the fact a block is
occuring I see the command NOP. 3 seconds later I check again and the
block is still occuring but the command says UPDATE.
I've searched the web extensively as well, so hopefully someone with
more visibility to the SQL Engine will see this and pipe up.
One interesting component, the server this is running on is a Quad
Processor Dell box with 4 Dual Core Xeon processors (1st generation
dual core chips) and they have it running hyperthreading as well. So
SQL sees 16 processors but there are really only 4 dual cores, which in
this family of Intels acts like about 1.5 each.
|||Mike H wrote:
...
> I'm still seeing it show up, it's not part of a deadlock as the
> deadlock isn't being found by basic tracking, though what found is it's
> a user creating a block. When I first catch the fact a block is
> occuring I see the command NOP. 3 seconds later I check again and the
> block is still occuring but the command says UPDATE.
> I've searched the web extensively as well, so hopefully someone with
> more visibility to the SQL Engine will see this and pipe up.
...
It's suprising that this is a valid wait state in SQL Server but no one
knows where it's coming from. I still see these come up and it would
be very helpful to know what's causing them.
|||Mike H wrote:
> Mike H wrote:
> ...
> ...
> It's suprising that this is a valid wait state in SQL Server but no one
> knows where it's coming from. I still see these come up and it would
> be very helpful to know what's causing them.
bueller ? anyone?
Showing posts with label command. Show all posts
Showing posts with label command. Show all posts
Monday, March 26, 2012
NOP command in Sysprocesses
Looking at blocking on a SQL Server 2000 system sitting on Windows 2003
Server I am somtimes catching a blocker sitting with multiple locks and
a command of NOP blocking an update user looking for a exclusive key
lock.
The main question is what is NOP command in SQL Server? Of the ones
I've been able to witness, the commands that come up as NOP, during the
blocking period will change to a INSERT cmd.
This system is SQL Server 2k Enterprise on a 4 processor box with AWE
mode and 16gb of memory.
I can't find any reference to this in any documentation and I seem to
recall hearing what such a command represented at one time but can't
find it now. My feeling is that this might help me identify some
performance issues (beyond the bad code I've already identified) so it
would help to understand what causes SQL Server to post that as a
command in Sysprocesses.
thanksNOP stands for no operation, which is a low level instruction that waits for
a specific number of cpu cycles. I am not much familiar with how it impacts
SQL server, but a quick googling suggests it may impact deadlocking, when
one process waiting for a resource held by the another process.
--
Anith|||Anith Sen wrote:
> NOP stands for no operation, which is a low level instruction that waits for
> a specific number of cpu cycles. I am not much familiar with how it impacts
> SQL server, but a quick googling suggests it may impact deadlocking, when
> one process waiting for a resource held by the another process.
>
Unfortunately I can't find any information regarding SQL Server
specifically, not even in the Inside SQL Server books I've read over
time.
I'm still seeing it show up, it's not part of a deadlock as the
deadlock isn't being found by basic tracking, though what found is it's
a user creating a block. When I first catch the fact a block is
occuring I see the command NOP. 3 seconds later I check again and the
block is still occuring but the command says UPDATE.
I've searched the web extensively as well, so hopefully someone with
more visibility to the SQL Engine will see this and pipe up.
One interesting component, the server this is running on is a Quad
Processor Dell box with 4 Dual Core Xeon processors (1st generation
dual core chips) and they have it running hyperthreading as well. So
SQL sees 16 processors but there are really only 4 dual cores, which in
this family of Intels acts like about 1.5 each.|||Mike H wrote:
...
> I'm still seeing it show up, it's not part of a deadlock as the
> deadlock isn't being found by basic tracking, though what found is it's
> a user creating a block. When I first catch the fact a block is
> occuring I see the command NOP. 3 seconds later I check again and the
> block is still occuring but the command says UPDATE.
> I've searched the web extensively as well, so hopefully someone with
> more visibility to the SQL Engine will see this and pipe up.
...
It's suprising that this is a valid wait state in SQL Server but no one
knows where it's coming from. I still see these come up and it would
be very helpful to know what's causing them.|||Mike H wrote:
> Mike H wrote:
> ...
> > I'm still seeing it show up, it's not part of a deadlock as the
> > deadlock isn't being found by basic tracking, though what found is it's
> > a user creating a block. When I first catch the fact a block is
> > occuring I see the command NOP. 3 seconds later I check again and the
> > block is still occuring but the command says UPDATE.
> >
> > I've searched the web extensively as well, so hopefully someone with
> > more visibility to the SQL Engine will see this and pipe up.
> ...
> It's suprising that this is a valid wait state in SQL Server but no one
> knows where it's coming from. I still see these come up and it would
> be very helpful to know what's causing them.
bueller ? anyone?
Server I am somtimes catching a blocker sitting with multiple locks and
a command of NOP blocking an update user looking for a exclusive key
lock.
The main question is what is NOP command in SQL Server? Of the ones
I've been able to witness, the commands that come up as NOP, during the
blocking period will change to a INSERT cmd.
This system is SQL Server 2k Enterprise on a 4 processor box with AWE
mode and 16gb of memory.
I can't find any reference to this in any documentation and I seem to
recall hearing what such a command represented at one time but can't
find it now. My feeling is that this might help me identify some
performance issues (beyond the bad code I've already identified) so it
would help to understand what causes SQL Server to post that as a
command in Sysprocesses.
thanksNOP stands for no operation, which is a low level instruction that waits for
a specific number of cpu cycles. I am not much familiar with how it impacts
SQL server, but a quick googling suggests it may impact deadlocking, when
one process waiting for a resource held by the another process.
--
Anith|||Anith Sen wrote:
> NOP stands for no operation, which is a low level instruction that waits for
> a specific number of cpu cycles. I am not much familiar with how it impacts
> SQL server, but a quick googling suggests it may impact deadlocking, when
> one process waiting for a resource held by the another process.
>
Unfortunately I can't find any information regarding SQL Server
specifically, not even in the Inside SQL Server books I've read over
time.
I'm still seeing it show up, it's not part of a deadlock as the
deadlock isn't being found by basic tracking, though what found is it's
a user creating a block. When I first catch the fact a block is
occuring I see the command NOP. 3 seconds later I check again and the
block is still occuring but the command says UPDATE.
I've searched the web extensively as well, so hopefully someone with
more visibility to the SQL Engine will see this and pipe up.
One interesting component, the server this is running on is a Quad
Processor Dell box with 4 Dual Core Xeon processors (1st generation
dual core chips) and they have it running hyperthreading as well. So
SQL sees 16 processors but there are really only 4 dual cores, which in
this family of Intels acts like about 1.5 each.|||Mike H wrote:
...
> I'm still seeing it show up, it's not part of a deadlock as the
> deadlock isn't being found by basic tracking, though what found is it's
> a user creating a block. When I first catch the fact a block is
> occuring I see the command NOP. 3 seconds later I check again and the
> block is still occuring but the command says UPDATE.
> I've searched the web extensively as well, so hopefully someone with
> more visibility to the SQL Engine will see this and pipe up.
...
It's suprising that this is a valid wait state in SQL Server but no one
knows where it's coming from. I still see these come up and it would
be very helpful to know what's causing them.|||Mike H wrote:
> Mike H wrote:
> ...
> > I'm still seeing it show up, it's not part of a deadlock as the
> > deadlock isn't being found by basic tracking, though what found is it's
> > a user creating a block. When I first catch the fact a block is
> > occuring I see the command NOP. 3 seconds later I check again and the
> > block is still occuring but the command says UPDATE.
> >
> > I've searched the web extensively as well, so hopefully someone with
> > more visibility to the SQL Engine will see this and pipe up.
> ...
> It's suprising that this is a valid wait state in SQL Server but no one
> knows where it's coming from. I still see these come up and it would
> be very helpful to know what's causing them.
bueller ? anyone?
NOP command in Sysprocesses
Looking at blocking on a SQL Server 2000 system sitting on Windows 2003
Server I am somtimes catching a blocker sitting with multiple locks and
a command of NOP blocking an update user looking for a exclusive key
lock.
The main question is what is NOP command in SQL Server? Of the ones
I've been able to witness, the commands that come up as NOP, during the
blocking period will change to a INSERT cmd.
This system is SQL Server 2k Enterprise on a 4 processor box with AWE
mode and 16gb of memory.
I can't find any reference to this in any documentation and I seem to
recall hearing what such a command represented at one time but can't
find it now. My feeling is that this might help me identify some
performance issues (beyond the bad code I've already identified) so it
would help to understand what causes SQL Server to post that as a
command in Sysprocesses.
thanksNOP stands for no operation, which is a low level instruction that waits for
a specific number of cpu cycles. I am not much familiar with how it impacts
SQL server, but a quick googling suggests it may impact deadlocking, when
one process waiting for a resource held by the another process.
Anith|||Anith Sen wrote:
> NOP stands for no operation, which is a low level instruction that waits f
or
> a specific number of cpu cycles. I am not much familiar with how it impact
s
> SQL server, but a quick googling suggests it may impact deadlocking, when
> one process waiting for a resource held by the another process.
>
Unfortunately I can't find any information regarding SQL Server
specifically, not even in the Inside SQL Server books I've read over
time.
I'm still seeing it show up, it's not part of a deadlock as the
deadlock isn't being found by basic tracking, though what found is it's
a user creating a block. When I first catch the fact a block is
occuring I see the command NOP. 3 seconds later I check again and the
block is still occuring but the command says UPDATE.
I've searched the web extensively as well, so hopefully someone with
more visibility to the SQL Engine will see this and pipe up.
One interesting component, the server this is running on is a Quad
Processor Dell box with 4 Dual Core Xeon processors (1st generation
dual core chips) and they have it running hyperthreading as well. So
SQL sees 16 processors but there are really only 4 dual cores, which in
this family of Intels acts like about 1.5 each.|||Mike H wrote:
...
> I'm still seeing it show up, it's not part of a deadlock as the
> deadlock isn't being found by basic tracking, though what found is it's
> a user creating a block. When I first catch the fact a block is
> occuring I see the command NOP. 3 seconds later I check again and the
> block is still occuring but the command says UPDATE.
> I've searched the web extensively as well, so hopefully someone with
> more visibility to the SQL Engine will see this and pipe up.
...
It's suprising that this is a valid wait state in SQL Server but no one
knows where it's coming from. I still see these come up and it would
be very helpful to know what's causing them.|||Mike H wrote:
> Mike H wrote:
> ...
> ...
> It's suprising that this is a valid wait state in SQL Server but no one
> knows where it's coming from. I still see these come up and it would
> be very helpful to know what's causing them.
bueller ? anyone?
Server I am somtimes catching a blocker sitting with multiple locks and
a command of NOP blocking an update user looking for a exclusive key
lock.
The main question is what is NOP command in SQL Server? Of the ones
I've been able to witness, the commands that come up as NOP, during the
blocking period will change to a INSERT cmd.
This system is SQL Server 2k Enterprise on a 4 processor box with AWE
mode and 16gb of memory.
I can't find any reference to this in any documentation and I seem to
recall hearing what such a command represented at one time but can't
find it now. My feeling is that this might help me identify some
performance issues (beyond the bad code I've already identified) so it
would help to understand what causes SQL Server to post that as a
command in Sysprocesses.
thanksNOP stands for no operation, which is a low level instruction that waits for
a specific number of cpu cycles. I am not much familiar with how it impacts
SQL server, but a quick googling suggests it may impact deadlocking, when
one process waiting for a resource held by the another process.
Anith|||Anith Sen wrote:
> NOP stands for no operation, which is a low level instruction that waits f
or
> a specific number of cpu cycles. I am not much familiar with how it impact
s
> SQL server, but a quick googling suggests it may impact deadlocking, when
> one process waiting for a resource held by the another process.
>
Unfortunately I can't find any information regarding SQL Server
specifically, not even in the Inside SQL Server books I've read over
time.
I'm still seeing it show up, it's not part of a deadlock as the
deadlock isn't being found by basic tracking, though what found is it's
a user creating a block. When I first catch the fact a block is
occuring I see the command NOP. 3 seconds later I check again and the
block is still occuring but the command says UPDATE.
I've searched the web extensively as well, so hopefully someone with
more visibility to the SQL Engine will see this and pipe up.
One interesting component, the server this is running on is a Quad
Processor Dell box with 4 Dual Core Xeon processors (1st generation
dual core chips) and they have it running hyperthreading as well. So
SQL sees 16 processors but there are really only 4 dual cores, which in
this family of Intels acts like about 1.5 each.|||Mike H wrote:
...
> I'm still seeing it show up, it's not part of a deadlock as the
> deadlock isn't being found by basic tracking, though what found is it's
> a user creating a block. When I first catch the fact a block is
> occuring I see the command NOP. 3 seconds later I check again and the
> block is still occuring but the command says UPDATE.
> I've searched the web extensively as well, so hopefully someone with
> more visibility to the SQL Engine will see this and pipe up.
...
It's suprising that this is a valid wait state in SQL Server but no one
knows where it's coming from. I still see these come up and it would
be very helpful to know what's causing them.|||Mike H wrote:
> Mike H wrote:
> ...
> ...
> It's suprising that this is a valid wait state in SQL Server but no one
> knows where it's coming from. I still see these come up and it would
> be very helpful to know what's causing them.
bueller ? anyone?
Friday, March 23, 2012
Noob Query Problem -This will be easy for you
This is driving me crazy. I am using a simple ASP table editor to make changes to an Access table. The following command is causing me to get an error:
UPDATE rates Set IRItype='A2', IRIProductName='Stylish', SQfeet='803', Bathrooms=1, IRIunitprice='600',
This is the error message:
Microsoft OLE DB Provider for ODBC Drivers error '80040e14'
[Microsoft][ODBC Microsoft Access Driver] Syntax error in UPDATE statement.
The SQL command is automaticly generated by the ASP script. I do not know if that extra comma is the cause of the error.is that all there was to the UPDATE statement? if so, it produces an error because it ends with a dangling comma
typically, you would have a WHERE clause, unless your intention is to update all rows to those values
so yeah, look into the ASP script|||The extra comma is certainly a problem. Also, make sure SQfeet and IRIunitprice are text values in the table. If they are numeric, then you wouldn't want the single quote surrounding the values.
UPDATE rates Set IRItype='A2', IRIProductName='Stylish', SQfeet='803', Bathrooms=1, IRIunitprice='600',
This is the error message:
Microsoft OLE DB Provider for ODBC Drivers error '80040e14'
[Microsoft][ODBC Microsoft Access Driver] Syntax error in UPDATE statement.
The SQL command is automaticly generated by the ASP script. I do not know if that extra comma is the cause of the error.is that all there was to the UPDATE statement? if so, it produces an error because it ends with a dangling comma
typically, you would have a WHERE clause, unless your intention is to update all rows to those values
so yeah, look into the ASP script|||The extra comma is certainly a problem. Also, make sure SQfeet and IRIunitprice are text values in the table. If they are numeric, then you wouldn't want the single quote surrounding the values.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
No Windows, Only SQL Server Authentication
Greetings,
I am unable to log onto the MS SQL Server 2000 using my Windows Login name
and Password from the MS command prompt program locally on a new test
installation Windows Enterprise Server 2003 system. However, if I use an
SQL Server Login and Password, it works every time. The command string I am
using is:
"osql.exe -S (local) -U login_name -P password"
When successful (SQL Authentication), an SQL command prompt is returned.
When unsuccessful (Windows Authentication), the following message is
received:
"Login failed for user login_name"
The SQL Server 2000 installation is enabled for both Windows and SQL
authentication and has been updated to the latest service packs.
The installation is a new test set up to experiment with Web Services using
MS SQL Server. The original problem was the installation of the
"wscrRecordStore" demonstration data base from the book, Programming
Microsoft .NET XML WEB SERVICES, by Foggon et al. However, the problem was
reduced to the simple command line issue above in order to troubleshoot it.
Since I am also the Windows and SQL Server system administrator, I have
tried a wide variety of different login strategies. Only users set up with
SQL Authentication seem to be able to access the SQL Server programatically.
What's the problem? This seems to be a straight forward but stubborn
failure.
Richard Scott
Critical Connections, Inc.To establish a Windows authenticated connection from OSQL, you need to
specify the -E parameter instead of -U and -P. This will use the account of
the currently logged in user. For example:
OSQL -S (local) -E
> Only users set up with SQL Authentication seem to be able to access the
SQL Server programatically.
Your connection string needs to specify the type of authentication desired.
Assuming you are using SqlClient:
Windows authentication:
Data Source=MyServer;Integrated Security=SSPI;Initial
Catalog=MyDatabase
SQL Server authentication:
Data Source=MyServer;User ID=MyLogin;Password=MyPassword;Initial
Catalog=MyDatabase
Also, see the article below for additional information on establishing a
trusted connection from ASP.NET:
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...989&Product=sql
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Richard Scott" <rtscott@.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:6XL6c.12481$zh1.7776@.newssvr27.news.prodigy.com...
> Greetings,
> I am unable to log onto the MS SQL Server 2000 using my Windows Login name
> and Password from the MS command prompt program locally on a new test
> installation Windows Enterprise Server 2003 system. However, if I use an
> SQL Server Login and Password, it works every time. The command string I
am
> using is:
> "osql.exe -S (local) -U login_name -P password"
> When successful (SQL Authentication), an SQL command prompt is returned.
> When unsuccessful (Windows Authentication), the following message is
> received:
> "Login failed for user login_name"
> The SQL Server 2000 installation is enabled for both Windows and SQL
> authentication and has been updated to the latest service packs.
> The installation is a new test set up to experiment with Web Services
using
> MS SQL Server. The original problem was the installation of the
> "wscrRecordStore" demonstration data base from the book, Programming
> Microsoft .NET XML WEB SERVICES, by Foggon et al. However, the problem
was
> reduced to the simple command line issue above in order to troubleshoot
it.
> Since I am also the Windows and SQL Server system administrator, I have
> tried a wide variety of different login strategies. Only users set up
with
> SQL Authentication seem to be able to access the SQL Server
programatically.
> What's the problem? This seems to be a straight forward but stubborn
> failure.
> Richard Scott
> Critical Connections, Inc.
>|||Not sure if this applies to you, but vefiry that the user who is attempting
to connect actually has a login established in SQL Server. You can do this
by expanding the Security folder in Enterprise Manager and looking at the
Logins.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
I am unable to log onto the MS SQL Server 2000 using my Windows Login name
and Password from the MS command prompt program locally on a new test
installation Windows Enterprise Server 2003 system. However, if I use an
SQL Server Login and Password, it works every time. The command string I am
using is:
"osql.exe -S (local) -U login_name -P password"
When successful (SQL Authentication), an SQL command prompt is returned.
When unsuccessful (Windows Authentication), the following message is
received:
"Login failed for user login_name"
The SQL Server 2000 installation is enabled for both Windows and SQL
authentication and has been updated to the latest service packs.
The installation is a new test set up to experiment with Web Services using
MS SQL Server. The original problem was the installation of the
"wscrRecordStore" demonstration data base from the book, Programming
Microsoft .NET XML WEB SERVICES, by Foggon et al. However, the problem was
reduced to the simple command line issue above in order to troubleshoot it.
Since I am also the Windows and SQL Server system administrator, I have
tried a wide variety of different login strategies. Only users set up with
SQL Authentication seem to be able to access the SQL Server programatically.
What's the problem? This seems to be a straight forward but stubborn
failure.
Richard Scott
Critical Connections, Inc.To establish a Windows authenticated connection from OSQL, you need to
specify the -E parameter instead of -U and -P. This will use the account of
the currently logged in user. For example:
OSQL -S (local) -E
> Only users set up with SQL Authentication seem to be able to access the
SQL Server programatically.
Your connection string needs to specify the type of authentication desired.
Assuming you are using SqlClient:
Windows authentication:
Data Source=MyServer;Integrated Security=SSPI;Initial
Catalog=MyDatabase
SQL Server authentication:
Data Source=MyServer;User ID=MyLogin;Password=MyPassword;Initial
Catalog=MyDatabase
Also, see the article below for additional information on establishing a
trusted connection from ASP.NET:
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...989&Product=sql
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
"Richard Scott" <rtscott@.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:6XL6c.12481$zh1.7776@.newssvr27.news.prodigy.com...
> Greetings,
> I am unable to log onto the MS SQL Server 2000 using my Windows Login name
> and Password from the MS command prompt program locally on a new test
> installation Windows Enterprise Server 2003 system. However, if I use an
> SQL Server Login and Password, it works every time. The command string I
am
> using is:
> "osql.exe -S (local) -U login_name -P password"
> When successful (SQL Authentication), an SQL command prompt is returned.
> When unsuccessful (Windows Authentication), the following message is
> received:
> "Login failed for user login_name"
> The SQL Server 2000 installation is enabled for both Windows and SQL
> authentication and has been updated to the latest service packs.
> The installation is a new test set up to experiment with Web Services
using
> MS SQL Server. The original problem was the installation of the
> "wscrRecordStore" demonstration data base from the book, Programming
> Microsoft .NET XML WEB SERVICES, by Foggon et al. However, the problem
was
> reduced to the simple command line issue above in order to troubleshoot
it.
> Since I am also the Windows and SQL Server system administrator, I have
> tried a wide variety of different login strategies. Only users set up
with
> SQL Authentication seem to be able to access the SQL Server
programatically.
> What's the problem? This seems to be a straight forward but stubborn
> failure.
> Richard Scott
> Critical Connections, Inc.
>|||Not sure if this applies to you, but vefiry that the user who is attempting
to connect actually has a login established in SQL Server. You can do this
by expanding the Security folder in Enterprise Manager and looking at the
Logins.
Rand
This posting is provided "as is" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Monday, February 20, 2012
No SRC in IMG tag in HTML Fragment
I am using the web service render command to pull out the HTML fragment to
display on a page but the SRC attribute of the IMG tags are all blank. I
know the image is available in the RenderStream but how do I link the two
together?
Is this just an HTML problem? If so where should I look?
Thanks in advance.
StevenThe location of the images can be specified via the StreamRoot device info.
However, the SRC tags should not be blank.
--
Brian Welcker
Group Program Manager
SQL Server Reporting Services
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Steven Lawrence" <steven@.metagenerics.co.za> wrote in message
news:O6QzEywaEHA.3012@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>I am using the web service render command to pull out the HTML fragment to
> display on a page but the SRC attribute of the IMG tags are all blank. I
> know the image is available in the RenderStream but how do I link the two
> together?
> Is this just an HTML problem? If so where should I look?
> Thanks in advance.
> Steven
>
>
display on a page but the SRC attribute of the IMG tags are all blank. I
know the image is available in the RenderStream but how do I link the two
together?
Is this just an HTML problem? If so where should I look?
Thanks in advance.
StevenThe location of the images can be specified via the StreamRoot device info.
However, the SRC tags should not be blank.
--
Brian Welcker
Group Program Manager
SQL Server Reporting Services
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Steven Lawrence" <steven@.metagenerics.co.za> wrote in message
news:O6QzEywaEHA.3012@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>I am using the web service render command to pull out the HTML fragment to
> display on a page but the SRC attribute of the IMG tags are all blank. I
> know the image is available in the RenderStream but how do I link the two
> together?
> Is this just an HTML problem? If so where should I look?
> Thanks in advance.
> Steven
>
>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)