question

xnl28 avatar image
xnl28 asked

ReportServer/Pages/ReportViewer.aspx vs Reports/Pages/Report.aspx

Does anyone know what the differences/benefits/recommendations/limitations are between using **ReportServer/Pages/ ReportViewer.aspx** to view SSRS reports versus using **Reports/Pages/ Report.aspx**? In our situation, we provide users with a list of reports which are URLs that contain ReportServer/Pages/ ReportViewer.aspx. I have noticed that there is a huge difference in client rendering performance when using ReportServer/Pages/ ReportViewer.aspx compared to using Reports/Pages/ Report.aspx. For example, a report takes about 30 seconds for the client to render when accessing via Reports/Pages/ Report.aspx; the same report takes over 4 minutes for the client to render when accessing via ReportServer/Pages/ ReportViewer.aspx. Interstingly, when running the reports from an SSRS 2008 server (not R2), there is no significant different in client rendering speed. As a work-around, I'd like to use Reports/Pages/ Report.aspx, but would like some suggestions from the SQL community about doing this.
ssrs-2008-r2
10 |1200
Toggle Comment visibility. Current Visibility: Viewable by all users

Up to 2 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 512.0 KiB each and 1.0 MiB total.

3 Answers

·
Fatherjack avatar image
Fatherjack answered
There are two distinct uses for the two links that you mention. The ReportServer... link is used via an application that has a SSRS report object embedded in it. This way your users can access SSRS reports without having to leave your applications. If you dont have an application to consume the reports via the ReportServer link then simply navigating to the Reports//Pages.. URL will show you the reports in the Report Manager interface.
3 comments
10 |1200
Toggle Comment visibility. Current Visibility: Viewable by all users

Up to 2 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 512.0 KiB each and 1.0 MiB total.

Fatherjack avatar image Fatherjack ♦♦ commented ·
I dont think you will get "issues" either way. The Report Manager is the default UI to access reports and navigate between them, the report server is the way to get the report content into a custom interface. Which ever gives your users the best experience and lets them work better is the one you should implement. Have you asked the users how they feel working with either option? I'd get some to do a usability test and work from there
2 Likes 2 ·
xnl28 avatar image xnl28 commented ·
@Jonathan Allen: Thanks. In our application, we provide the users with a list of hyperlinked URLs. Clicking on one opens the SSRS report up in a separate Internet Explorer window. Given that we are using it this way, it sounds like using the Reports/Pages... URL would not cause any issues.
0 Likes 0 ·
xnl28 avatar image xnl28 commented ·
One big issue is performance: some reports take much, much longer for the client to render when using ReportServer then when using Report Manager. I am currently experiencing this issue in 2008 R2 with a report with a few thousand rows.
0 Likes 0 ·
xnl28 avatar image
xnl28 answered
Another issue is that the Report/ Report.aspx link does not honour the commands such as rc:Parameters=Collapsed and rs:format=PDF.
10 |1200
Toggle Comment visibility. Current Visibility: Viewable by all users

Up to 2 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 512.0 KiB each and 1.0 MiB total.

saadzaman avatar image
saadzaman answered

i need this for trail

10 |1200
Toggle Comment visibility. Current Visibility: Viewable by all users

Up to 2 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 512.0 KiB each and 1.0 MiB total.

Write an Answer

Hint: Notify or tag a user in this post by typing @username.

Up to 2 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 512.0 KiB each and 1.0 MiB total.