Getting a row count from a DataSource vs GridView

There HAS to be an easier way to do this...

I have 2 seperate SqlDataSources for 2 distinct filters. How do I get a simple row count for each SqlDataSource? It seems the only way is by using the ObjectDataSource and going through that whole mess (paging, etc.). And unfortunately, you can't simply get the number of rows in the GridView that represents each DataSource if AllowPaging is true for the GridView.

This is frustrating.

Dave

You gotta setup the Selected Event

protected void SqlDataSource1_Selected( object sender, SqlDataSourceStatusEventArgs e )
{
e.AffectedRows;
}

|||

Can you give me a little more insight...

Thanks,

Dave

|||

Not sure how much more detailed I can get. When you setup your SqlDataSources, put

<asp:SqlDataSourceID="SqlDataSource1"runat="server"OnSelected="SqlDataSource_Selected" ... />
<asp:SqlDataSourceID="SqlDataSource2"runat="server"OnSelected="SqlDataSource_Selected".../>

They both should be able to use the same event since you want them both to do the same thing.

Then in your code-beside, setup the event as follows

protectedvoid SqlDataSource_Selected(object sender,SqlDataSourceStatusEventArgs e )
{
// Do something with e.AffectedRows
Response.Write( e.AffectedRows );
}

Get size of a table/query

Is there a way to get the size of a query of a table?

I know I can use DATALENGTH on every column in my query, but I thought there might be an easier way.what exacly do you mean by size?, number of rows?|||see sp_spaceused in BOL|||sp_spaceused will get the size of the table, but I would like to get the size of results from a query. Would I need to create a temp table from my query and then use sp_spaceused to get the size of the temp table?|||I think it is a possibility
Also you can look through the sp_apceused code to see how they do it|||Yes, it does appear to be possible. I wonder though, it seems a lot more "expensive" to create a temporary table and then get the size of it than to use SUM(DATALENGTH(mycolumn)), but I could be wrong. The reason I say that is one of the tables I'm using this on contains image(blob) data which can be very large. If I have to copy all of that data into a temp table, that could be a bit sluggish. Anyone know performance wise which is better to use?|||you are right
it is definitely non performant

why do you want to measure the query ?
may be there is another way to do what you are trying to do ?|||I have a CMS. Multiple clients use the same tables in my CMS but I need to discover how much space each individual client is taking up. The only way to do this that I've found is to measure the size of the query data.|||it is not good way.
You can just have clientid in each row in the tables (and/or separate clients table)
and count rows each client has (anyway counting rows)|||I assume you mean getting the size of the entire table and calculating client size based on their number of rows times and average size/row. I don't think this is an accurate assessment of how much space a client is consuming especially when one of the columns in the table is a blob field. One client could be consuming most of the space in the table because of a huge value for the blob field in a single record. Using the SUM of DATALENGTH of the blob field works for me. I already have each record assigned a clientID so I can get an accurate count of how much space they are taking up. I just thought there might be a better way other than using SUM of DATALENGTH.