B1 and SQL Server 2005 performance with 3.000.000 invoice-lines per year

I would like to know if SAP Business One with SQL Server 2005 could work with the following information:
- 40.000 Business Partners
- 40.000 Invoices per month
- Aprox. 3.000.000 invoice-lines per year
Of course it will be necessary to change some forms in B1.
What do you think?
Do you know any B1 customer working with that amout of data?

> Hi,
>
> I think a good SQL2005 tuning (done by a good DBA)
> will improve performance. Number of records like that
> shouldn't hurt that kind of DB engine...
Hi,
I'm sure that MSSQL2005 can handle the amount of records & transactions in question. Even MSSQL 2000 can do it. However, any DB engine can be put on its knees with the combination of 2-tier application architecture and badly designed queries. B1 is a case in point. I wouldn't go into such a project without decent preliminary load testing and explicit commitment for support from SAP B1 dev team.
I have heard from implementation projects where B1 simply couldn't handle the amount of data. I've also participated in some presales cases for B1 where we decided not to take a project because we saw that B1 couldn't handle the amount of data (while the other features of B1 would have been more than enough for the customer). The one you're currently looking at seems like one of those.
Henry

Similar Messages

SQL Server 2005 performance decreases with DB size while SQL Server 2012 is fine

Hi,
We have a C# windows service running that polls some files and inserts/updates some fields in database.
The service was tested on a local dev machine with SQL Server 2012 running and performance was quite decent with any number of records. Later on the service was moved to a test stage environment where SQL Server 2005 is installed. At that point database
was still empty and service was running just fine but later on, after some 500k records were written, performance problems came to light. After some more tests we've founds out that, basically, database operation performance in SQL Server 2005 decreases with
a direct correlation with the database size. Here are some testing results:
Run#
1
2
3
4
5
DB size (records)
520k
620k
720k
820k
920k
SQL Server 2005
TotalRunTime
25:25.1
32:25.4
38:27.3
42:50.5
43:51.8
Get1
00:18.3
00:18.9
00:20.1
00:20.1
00:19.3
Get2
01:13.4
01:17.9
01:21.0
01:21.2
01:17.5
Get3
01:19.5
01:24.6
01:28.4
01:29.3
01:24.8
Count1
00:19.9
00:18.7
00:17.9
00:18.7
00:19.1
Count2
00:44.5
00:45.7
00:45.9
00:47.0
00:46.0
Count3
00:21.7
00:21.7
00:21.7
00:22.3
00:22.3
Count4
00:23.6
00:23.9
00:23.9
00:24.9
00:24.5
Process1
03:10.6
03:15.4
03:14.7
03:21.5
03:19.6
Process2
17:08.7
23:35.7
28:53.8
32:58.3
34:46.9
Count5
00:02.3
00:02.3
00:02.3
00:02.3
00:02.1
Count6
00:01.6
00:01.6
00:01.6
00:01.7
00:01.7
Count7
00:01.9
00:01.9
00:01.7
00:02.0
00:02.0
Process3
00:02.0
00:01.8
00:01.8
00:01.8
00:01.8
SQL Server 2012
TotalRunTime
12:51.6
13:38.7
13:20.4
13:38.0
12:38.8
Get1
00:21.6
00:21.7
00:20.7
00:22.7
00:21.4
Get2
01:38.3
01:37.2
01:31.6
01:39.2
01:37.3
Get3
01:41.7
01:42.1
01:35.9
01:44.5
01:41.7
Count1
00:20.3
00:19.9
00:19.9
00:21.5
00:17.3
Count2
01:04.5
01:04.8
01:05.3
01:10.0
01:01.0
Count3
00:24.5
00:24.1
00:23.7
00:26.0
00:21.7
Count4
00:26.3
00:24.6
00:25.1
00:27.5
00:23.7
Process1
03:52.3
03:57.7
03:59.4
04:21.2
03:41.4
Process2
03:05.4
03:06.2
02:53.2
03:10.3
03:06.5
Count5
00:02.8
00:02.7
00:02.6
00:02.8
00:02.7
Count6
00:02.3
00:03.0
00:02.8
00:03.4
00:02.4
Count7
00:02.5
00:02.9
00:02.8
00:03.4
00:02.5
Process3
00:21.7
00:21.0
00:20.4
00:22.8
00:21.5
One more thing is that it's not Process2 table that constantly grows in size but is Process1 table, that gets almost 100k records each run.
After that SQL Server 2005 has also been installed on a dev machine just to test things and we got exactly the same results. Both SQL Server 2005 and 2012 instances are installed using default settings with no changes at all. The same goes for databases
created for the service.
So the question is - why are there such huge differences between performance of SQL Server 2005 and 2012? Maybe there are some settings that are set by default in SQL Server 2012 database that need to be set manually in 2005?
What else can I try to test? The main problem is that production SQL Server will be updated god-knows-when and we can't just wait for that.
Any suggestions/advices are more than welcome.

...One more thing is that it's not Process2 table that constantly grows in size but is
Process1 table, that gets almost 100k records each run....
Hi,
It is not clear to me what is that you are doing, but now we have a better understanding on ONE of your tables an it is obviously you will get worse result as the data become bigger. Actually your table look like a automatic build table by ORM like Entity
Framework, and it's DDL probably do not much your needs. For example if your select query is using a filter on the other column that [setID] then you have no index and the server probably have to scan the entire table in order to find the records that you
need.
Forum is a suitable place to seek advice about a specific system (as I mentioned before we are not familiar with your system), and it is more suitable for general questions. For example the fact that you have no index except the index on the column [setID]
can indicate a problem. Ultimately to optimize the system will need to investigate it more thoroughly (as it is no longer appropriate forum ... but we're not there yet). Another point is that now we can see that you are using [timestamp] column, an this
implies that your are using this column as a filter for selecting the data. If so, then maybe a better DDL will be to use clustered index on this column and if needed a nonclustered index on the [setID] if it is needed at all...
what is obviously is that next is to check if this DDL fit
your specific needs (as i mentioned before).
Next step is to understand what action do you do with this table. (1) what is your query which become slowly in a bigger data set. (2) Are you using ORM (object relational mapping, like Entity Framework
code first), and if so then which one.
[Personal Site] [Blog] [Facebook]

JPA and SQL Server 2005's Identity Don't Play Nice

I am hoping someone with a little more senior knowledge of JPASQL Server 2005 can point me in the right direction involving SQL Server 2005.
What I am discovering is JPA and SQL Server 2005 do not playing nice together when you use the IDENTITY capability for
a primary key. Let me explain. "...when using the IDENTITY as the generator type, the value for the identity field MAY NOT be
available BEFORE the entity data is saved in the database because typically it is generated when a record is committed."
My problem is this.
I have two separate entities using another entity, for example a car has a wheel and a truck has a wheel. I can go through the steps
of persisting the car and the wheel with no problem. My problem begins when I try to
find the wheel (by wheel description) for the truck. The query finds the wheel, but does not return the primary key for wheel.
Therefore, using the PK inside a query generates this error:
java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: An instance of a null PK has been incorrectly provided for this find operation. What has been my appraoch to get the entity to commit to the database is to use the following sequence for the Entity Manager.
entityManager.persist(wheel);
entityManager.flush(); I have assumed to this point this action would persist my data because I have been able to retrieve the PK immidately after these steps.
However, multiple actions taking place within the same transaction, appears to render the persist and flush steps useless. My initial thought
is to wrap the wheel creation within a new transaction so when the method/transaction completes, the data would be in the database. This
has not worked.
I hope I have explained this clear for others to follow. I apologize in advance if I have not. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.

I am hoping someone with a little more senior knowledge of JPASQL Server 2005 can point me in the right direction involving SQL Server 2005.
What I am discovering is JPA and SQL Server 2005 do not playing nice together when you use the IDENTITY capability for
a primary key. Let me explain. "...when using the IDENTITY as the generator type, the value for the identity field MAY NOT be
available BEFORE the entity data is saved in the database because typically it is generated when a record is committed."
My problem is this.
I have two separate entities using another entity, for example a car has a wheel and a truck has a wheel. I can go through the steps
of persisting the car and the wheel with no problem. My problem begins when I try to
find the wheel (by wheel description) for the truck. The query finds the wheel, but does not return the primary key for wheel.
Therefore, using the PK inside a query generates this error:
java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: An instance of a null PK has been incorrectly provided for this find operation. What has been my appraoch to get the entity to commit to the database is to use the following sequence for the Entity Manager.
entityManager.persist(wheel);
entityManager.flush(); I have assumed to this point this action would persist my data because I have been able to retrieve the PK immidately after these steps.
However, multiple actions taking place within the same transaction, appears to render the persist and flush steps useless. My initial thought
is to wrap the wheel creation within a new transaction so when the method/transaction completes, the data would be in the database. This
has not worked.
I hope I have explained this clear for others to follow. I apologize in advance if I have not. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.

Unable to connect SQL server 2005 databse with JSF applications !

Hello guys!
Help me out to connect SQL server 2005 Databse with JSF applications using JDBC-ODBC bridge. I'm working with Netbeans 6.1 IDE.
I tried for the basic applications but instead got this error:
"unable to deploy jdbc drivers to the <project>domain/lib"
Please help me out with working sample codes that connects MS SQL server 2005 DB with JSF!!
Thank you guys!

1) don't use the bridge driver
2) don't do database access from JSF
3) learn how to use your application server
4) learn how to use your IDE

Connectivity Issue with Vista and SQL Server 2005

Hi all;
I am unable to log into SQL Server 2005 due to a connectivity problem.
When I telnet on the port for the server, the attempt at a connection fails.
Does anyone have any ideas as to what I should do?
THANKS!!!
Wally

Closed the thread regarding: http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/sqlsecurity/thread/c20ee682-d329-4678-a8a6-6e10b746bf0e/
Using the elevated mode fixed the problem.
Jens K. Suessmeyer

Crystal Reports 9 and SQL Server 2005 default parameter values

We're using Crystal Reports 9 and upgraded from SQL Server 2000 to SQL Server 2005.
I'm noticing a very weird problem which I wonder if anyone else has experienced (and hopefully found a resolution for). It appears that in using Crystal with SQL Server 2005 stored procedures, if we have default parameter values in the stored procedures, the default parameter values get completely ignored if you pass in a NULL value from Crystal!
For example, if you have a stored procedure that begins like this:
ALTER Procedure [dbo].[StoredProcedure]
@Param1 VarChar(200) = '',
@Param2 VarChar(200) = ''
AS ...
both @Param1 and @Param2 have a default value of an empty string, and therefore should become empty strings if nothing (NULL values) gets passed in for them.
But, like I said, what I'm finding is that with Crystal calling the stored procedure with NULL @Param1 and @Param2 values, they never become empty strings, but rather remain as NULLs.
This was never a problem with SQL 2000.
Very perplexing. Anyone else every experience this?
Thank you.

Please ignore my earlier post -- answered my own question.
NULL parameter values do not get replaced by default values in SQL -- that is normal behavior in both SQL 2000 and SQL 2005. Just goes to show, that no many how many years programming experience you have, you can still get tripped up sometimes : (

SQL Server 2005 replaced with SQL Server 2014 trying to connect front end Access as guest (read only ODBC)

We have replaced a SQL Server 2005 with a SQL Server 2014 (new physical server.) Have the new server set up to use SQL Server login OR Windows user login. Had old server connecting (for a particular DB) to front end Access (2010 or 2013) as guest for
anyone logged into the Windows NT Network with a read only ODBC connection. Have the DB in the new server set to include guest as db_datareader (with only SELECT permission for the securables of each table and view being linked) but when any Windows user not
specifically listed as a SQL DB user tries to use the front end they get an error of:
Microsoft SQL Server Login
Connection failed:
SQL State: '28000'
SQL Server Error: 18456
[Microsoft][OCBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server] Login failed for user {domain\user}.
After closing that pop-up window a server login window appears. Of course, since the guest user is not specifically listed as a user in the DB that fails also. It seems like there should be a very simple solution to this, but I can't seem to find it. I want
to allow anyone logged in on the Windows system (locally) to be able to open the MS Access file (on their work station machine) and run their own (read only; select) queries on the SQL Server database. Any suggestions?
Thanks a billion in advance ----

Thanks for the response Olaf. I have now spent weeks researching this. I realize that using the guest account in most situations is not advised. As mentioned, I have restricted the guest account to allow the db_datareader role only, and have explicitly denied
all other roles, as well as allowing select only, and still have no access for the guest account.
The suggested fix in the second link you provided, of using Windows groups is not plausible for my situation either. We are a scientific field research institution, with a few long term users and lots of users that may have Windows accounts for a few months,
and then they are gone. It would be a nightmare for the network tech to try to keep a group account up to date, and we need to give access (read only, of course) to anyone logged into the system. Realize that the ONLY access of any kind to this database is
thru MS Access ACCDB, using a (by default) read only OCDB connection.
This type of access is used particularly because researchers need to be able to set up their own queries, and the MS Access query interface is particularly convenient for people who are not themselves SQL experts, yet are trying to get some very advanced
levels of output. Putting the database online is not practical because then we are back to the need for a comprehensive query interface, and just picking up general subsets of the data online (from a basic web page search feature) would be out of the question,
since the result set would involve hundreds of thousands if not millions of records.
So - that said - what exactly would you suggest, assuming we don't have the funds to buy a whole new system, and have spent plenty of money with Microsoft's Enterprise level MS Office so that all work stations have MS Access, and Microsoft's SQL Server,
as well as running our network on Microsoft's network software.

OWB 11.0.0.7 and SQL SERver 2005

We did search quite a bit but couldnt get this working...
We are using OWB 11.1.0.7 64bit on Windows 2003 Server 64bit R2
We have to pull data from a SQl Server database – SQL SERVER 2005 64 bit on Windows 2008 R2 64 bit
WE followed the procedures given in Oracle documentation –
1. creating a ODBC DSN connection
2. creating a init ora file for that connection
3. creating a listener
We tried with both HSODBC and DG4ODBC... We can connect to SQL server through OWB...the connection is successful but I cannot import the tables into OWB. It simply hangs forever. (in the init ora file we have put the HS_FDS_SUPPORT_STATISTICS=FALSE) We have to pull data from SQL server on an ongoing basis. However we found a workaround – we can create a remote link to the SQL server database by creating an entry in the tnsnames. However this connection is very slow – we have to pull thousands of records on daily basis. IT takes quite some time to do this. We have tried different combinations after Goodling.
Could you shed some light on this? Is it a bug in OWB 11.1 that we cannot connect to SQL Serer or are we missing something? Will it be ok if we go for 11.2?

Be wary about the differences between initialization settings for generic ODBC vs specific SQLServer gateway, they are different.
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B28359_01/gateways.111/b31049/apd.htm#BABHEBCE
The installation guide has details in the SQLServer section for when the SQLServer gateway is used that you should follow (specifically under configuring SQL Server Views for Data Dictionary support - needed for importing tables definitions into OWB when you use SQLServer gateway);
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B28359_01/gateways.111/b31042/toc.htm
If you have an existing database link this can be used in OWB. When importing the tables you need to be aware that if it is a SQLServer gateway you will need to configure the SQLServer instance as in the gateway doc above). Just because you can query table data does not mean the gateway is configured properly.
Cheers
David

Freetds and sql server 2005

Hi guys
I'm trying to create dblink from 10.2.0.4 database to sql server 2005 using freeTDS. Oracle database is on OEL5, ODBC is installed on another OEL5 machine with database gateway installed and listener started.
So far everything woks fine. However it seems that something is wrong with character set conversion. I'm getting twice as much characters (character followed by a box character). I'm guessing this is 2 byte character set that has not been converted to 1 byte. Oracle DB has nls_characterset set to 'EE8ISO8859P2'.
What setting should be set in init<>.ora for the DG4ODBC and freetds.conf?
I also tried trial easysoft odbc driver and it works fine with these parameters in odbc.ini:
# Convert UCS-2 encoded Unicode data to UTF-8
ConvToUtf = Yes
# Also do this conversion for data passed to Unicode ODBC function (SQLxxxW) calls
ConvWToUtf = Yes

I saw a similar behaviour using an Oracle unicode database. In this case try a unicode compliant tool like SQL Developer, connect to the Oracle db with the db link and select from the linked table.
What is the source column data type and did you specify HS_LANGUAGE in the hsodbc init file?
Edited by: kgronau on Nov 27, 2009 11:45 AM

OraOledb for 64-bit, Linked Servers and SQL Server 2005 issues

Our environment is : SQL Server 2005, Windows Server 2003, 64-bit and 32-bit operating systems.
Problem on 64-bit operating system box: (32-bit works fine).
I am trying to access Oracle 10g database using linked server from our SQL Server 2005. In case of number fileds i got the following error:
Invalid data for type "numeric".
After going through one of the posting in this forumn i was able to resolve the problem by converting those column values to char while querying and then converting them back to numeric type on SQL server side.
But today i ran into another problem. There is a VARCHAR2 column. I was able to retrieve the data yesterday for that column but today i am getting a blank recordset. If i exclude the colum from the query then i am getting all the rows.
I am querying against a view and it has got a number of columns whose data type is VARCHAR2.
Again the problem is on 64-bit operating system only. We have a 32-bit operating system on which i am able to retrieve the data including this column. I looked at the data and everything looks OK. No funny characters etc.
I tried workarounds like using cast, to_char, checking for nulls etc., Nothing works.
Any help is greately appreciated. Thanks.

Did you find a resolution for this? We have similar problem. Set up a linked server in SQL 2006 to Oracle (running on Windows 64-bit) Linked server works and views I had set up were working but they added some new data in the Oracle test database I am using and now I get errors on one of the views.
Error I am getting on the view is "Cannot initialize the data source object of OLE DB Provider "OraOLDEDB.ORacle" for the linked server"
If I fine tune my queries to find the specific table or view that is at issue, then I get the error "inconsistent metadata for a column"

BO XI R2 and SQL server 2005 Analysis services

Post Author: fasttrack
CA Forum: Olap
Hello,
I am new in BO, I am using XI R2 and I would like to know this:
I have to build some reports on Data Warehouse using SQL server 2005 Analysis Services.
My question is:
1) How I have to build this reports: directly to data warehouse or building an OLAP (CUBE) in analysis services 2005?
2) BO XI R2 supports SQL server 2005 and especially in this case Analysis services 2005 and provider (I have seen only provider for SQL Server 2000)?
Do you some good resources where to learn how to make reports on DW SQL server 2005?
Thank

Post Author: ShaunOberem
CA Forum: Olap
Hello,
I am new in BO, I am using XI R2 and I would like to know this:
I have to build some reports on Data Warehouse using SQL server 2005 Analysis Services.
My question is:
1) How I have to build this reports: directly to data warehouse or building an OLAP (CUBE) in analysis services 2005?
2) BO XI R2 supports SQL server 2005 and especially in this case Analysis services 2005 and provider (I have seen only provider for SQL Server 2000)?
Do you some good resources where to learn how to make reports on DW SQL server 2005?
Thank
Hi,
If you are trying to create a new OLAP Intelligence Report using SQL 05 I am afraid you are out of luck.
You will need to get a copy of the Productivity Pack (Available for Download in Subscribenet) .
Also, in your SQL Server Sufrace Configuraiton manager try setting Analysis Services to Allow Ananomous connections. This will make sure you get a little further initially. (Dont leave Anonymous on)

OraOledb, Linked Servers and SQL Server 2005 issues

Some issues I've come across when using SQL Server 2005 (and SQL Server Express 2005), the OraOLEDB provider (10.2.0.1) and a linked Oracle database (8.1.7.4.0 64-bit)
1) You must set the OraOledb.Oracle\AllowInProcess value to 1 to allow the OraOledb provider to run in SQL Server's process. Without doing this I receive an 'unspecified error' from the OLE DB provider when attempting to run a query
2) When running a ' select * ' query across a linked server using the provider, I receive the following error: Msg 9803, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Invalid data for type "numeric". I can, however, select all of the columns by name and the query completes (no error). Sometimes the 'select *' query returns a few rows before the error, sometimes it doesn't. The Microsoft Provider for Oracle does not have this problem

Okay... I've got a Win2K3 Std Ed server (x64) running 64-bit SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edition. I've installed the Oracle 10g 10.2.1 full client and admin tools, added two named services via the NetConfig assistant, and successfully set up (and tested) a connection via the ODBC Administrator to an Oracle database.
Now... when I try to create a new connection manager in SQL Server 2005 Integration Services, the OLEDB provider for Oracle can't be found, and when I try to manually add an underlying OLEDB connection to the database, SQL Server reports:
Test connection failed because of an error in initializing provider. The 'OraOLEDB.Oracle.1' provider is not registered on the local machine.
Does anyone know what I need to do to see my ODBC Server data connections in SQL Server 2005 (64 bit)? I don't have this issue on my 32-bit SQL Server 2005 servers.

Installing Dialog Instances with ECC 6.0 and SQL Server 2005

Hi, I have my ECC 6.0 SAP Server, it is Central Instance, Database instance, all in one. My users are working fine, however we will be adding some new users (15) and we want add a Dialog Instance. Can I add one Dialog instance to my landscape without any changes to my SAP Server ??? ..... My dialog instance will be in a new host.
My hardware SAP Server is: 16 GB RAM, 500 GB RAID 5 for my database, four processors.
What could be my Dialogue Instance hardware?
I have read than I must install with sapinst and select Dialogue Instance and follow instructions. Are there any others considerations?? .....
Do I must install SQL Server in the host Dialog instance ??.
Please if you have some suggestions.
Regards.

Hello Jose,
You can install your dialog instance without doing any change to the existing setup as you have mentioned its on a seprate new host.
Two CPU's and 8GB memory would be fine for your dialog instance.It all depends on your requirement.
Yes you need to install the dialog instance using SAPINST, its kool and sapinst would take care of all.
You need not install any SQL server in the dialog instance host only you need to have a SQL client installed but that would be taken care by SAPINST.
Hope this would clarify your query.
Thanks and Regards,
-Bijesh.

SQL server 2005 problem with service starting

I am having a problem starting my sqlserver service. It will not start and therefore i have no access to my sql 2005 server database. This is what in the event log. This database was working fine until i had two drives kill over in a RAID configuration.
The striping went out with a hitch and no i want to see if anyone have any ideas before i perform a restore. Do i need to run SQL server repair with the installation disk?

Well from viewing the log it looks like i am in a pickle. Since the SQL service won't start, is there a command or script to run for a database check using powershell? Since it looks like i will be doing a restore, just curious now.
2014-01-16 15:27:58.30 spid5s      Starting up database 'master'.
2014-01-16 15:27:59.81 spid5s      Error: 824, Severity: 24, State: 2.
2014-01-16 15:27:59.81 spid5s      SQL Server detected a logical consistency-based I/O error: incorrect pageid (expected 1:363; actual 0:0). It occurred during a read of page (1:363) in database ID 1 at offset 0x000000002d6000 in file
'W:\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\DATA\master.mdf'. Additional messages in the SQL Server error log or system event log may provide more detail. This is a severe error condition that threatens database integrity and must be corrected immediately.
Complete a full database consistency check (DBCC CHECKDB). This error can be caused by many factors; for more information, see SQL Server Books Online.
2014-01-16 15:27:59.81 spid6s      Error: 922, Severity: 14, State: 1.
2014-01-16 15:27:59.81 spid6s      Database 'master' is being recovered. Waiting until recovery is finished.
2014-01-16 15:27:59.81 spid6s      System Task System Task produced an error that was not handled. Major: 9, Minor: 22, Severity:14, State:1
2014-01-16 15:27:59.81 spid5s      Error: 3313, Severity: 21, State: 2.
2014-01-16 15:27:59.81 spid5s      During redoing of a logged operation in database 'master', an error occurred at log record ID (2369:160:2). Typically, the specific failure is previously logged as an error in the Windows Event Log
service. Restore the database from a full backup, or repair the database.
2014-01-16 15:27:59.81 spid5s      Cannot recover the master database. SQL Server is unable to run. Restore master from a full backup, repair it, or rebuild it. For more information about how to rebuild the master database, see SQL
Server Books Online.

Sql server 2005 reports with sql server 2014

Can i upload SSRS 2005 reports as it is on SSRS 2014 and use it without doing anything extra or without changing anything ??
I can use SSRS 2005 reports as it is with SSRS 2012. But for SSRS 2014 not sure.
h2007

You can upgrade the the RDL schema will be upgraded.
Report definition (.rdl) files are automatically upgraded in the following ways:
When you open a report in Report Designer in SQL Server Data Tools (SSDT), the report definition is upgraded to the currently supported RDL schema. When you specify a SQL Server 2008 or SQL Server 2008 R2 report server in the project properties, the report
definition is saved in a schema that is compatible with the target server.
When you upgrade a Reporting Services installation to a SQL Server 2014 Reporting Services (SSRS) installation, existing reports and snapshots that have been published to a report server are compiled and automatically upgraded to the new schema the first
time they are processed. If a report cannot be automatically upgraded, the report is processed using the backward-compatibility mode. The report definition remains in the original schema.
Reports are not upgraded when you upload a report definition file directly to the report server or SharePoint site. Upgrading a report definition in SQL Server Data Tools is the only way to upgrade the .rdl file.
After a report is upgraded locally or on the report server, you might notice additional errors, warnings, and messages. This is the result of changes to the internal report object model and processing components, which cause messages to appear when underlying
problems in the report are detected. For more information, see Reporting Services Backward Compatibility.
For more information about new features for SQL Server 2014 Reporting Services (SSRS), see
What's New (Reporting Services).
Check the below Microsoft link for more information
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms143674.aspx
Mudassar

B1 and SQL Server 2005 performance with 3.000.000 invoice-lines per year

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for