master sysmessages: sort

Showing posts with label sort. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Max Count(*) question

I have a max(count(*)) sort of question.

Table ACCOUNT_PRODUCTS has:

ACCOUNT_PRODUCT_ID, ACCOUNT_NUMBER, PRODUCT_ID

Table PRODUCTS has:

PRODUCT_ID, PRODUCT_NAME, PRODUCT_CLASS

I need to get back a result set of ACCOUNT_NUMBERS and the PRODUCT_CLASS that is the one that is represented most often for the ACCOUNT_NUMBER.

I.e.,

Acct1 has 3 products in Class "Q", 2 in Class "W" and 5 in Class "C"
Acct2 has 1 product in Class "V" and 1 in Class "S"

Results Set should pick first product class if the count is the same and return:

Acct1, C
Acct2, V

I am baffled!

Thanks in advance,

Steve.Break the problem into logical steps:

1) Get the counts by account and class:

select account, class, count(*) cnt
from ...
group by account, class;
2) Get the max count per account:

select account, max(cnt) maxcnt
from
( select account, class, count(*) cnt
from ...
group by account, class
)
group by account;
3) Get details of account and class for those max(cnt) values:

select account, class
from
( select account, class, count(*) cnt
from ...
group by account, class
)
where (account, cnt) in
( select account, max(cnt) maxcnt
from
( select account, class, count(*) cnt
from ...
group by account, class
)
group by account
);
Now that does look messy. If your DBMS supports the WITH clause then you can rewrite as:

with temp as
( select account, class, count(*) cnt
from ...
group by account, class
)
select account, class
from temp
where (account, cnt) in
( select account, max(cnt) maxcnt
from temp
group by account
);

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Matrix Sorting

I want to sort my matrix by the subtotals. Is this possible? Does anyone
know how to do this?
ThanksI figured out this solution by using the InScope function in my Row Group
Sort feature
"Web Developer DM" wrote:
> I want to sort my matrix by the subtotals. Is this possible? Does anyone
> know how to do this?
> Thanks

Monday, March 19, 2012

Matrix PDF

Is there some sort of calculation to make a matrix export to pdf without page breaks?
I have
2 dynamic rows
1 dynamic column
1 value field
Please help
thanksPlease make sure that your report is setup as follows:
Report.PageWidth - Report.LeftMargin - Report.Right Margin) >=Body.Width
--
Bruce Johnson [MSFT]
Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"AHH" <AHH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CE79F248-E5B9-4500-84C6-5CB91195BA6C@.microsoft.com...
> Is there some sort of calculation to make a matrix export to pdf without
page breaks?
> I have
> 2 dynamic rows
> 1 dynamic column
> 1 value field
> Please help
> thanks
>|||Would you please post or send me your RDL? I will need it to understand your
situation better.
--
Bruce Johnson [MSFT]
Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"AHH" <AHH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8F4A4F3C-63DD-4F66-B24C-952BBF52A728@.microsoft.com...
> Report.PageWidth - Report.LeftMargin - Report.Right Margin = 8
> My body.width is 3.5
> Thanks
>
> "Bruce Johnson [MSFT]" wrote:
> > Please make sure that your report is setup as follows:
> > Report.PageWidth - Report.LeftMargin - Report.Right Margin) >=> > Body.Width
> >
> > --
> > Bruce Johnson [MSFT]
> > Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services
> >
> > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
> >
> >
> > "AHH" <AHH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:CE79F248-E5B9-4500-84C6-5CB91195BA6C@.microsoft.com...
> > > Is there some sort of calculation to make a matrix export to pdf
without
> > page breaks?
> > >
> > > I have
> > > 2 dynamic rows
> > > 1 dynamic column
> > > 1 value field
> > >
> > > Please help
> > >
> > > thanks
> > >
> >
> >
> >|||How many ReferringPhysicians do you have? If you are expecting the matrix to
fit to a specific size as column groups are added, this is not supported.
--
Brian Welcker
Group Program Manager
SQL Server Reporting Services
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"AHH" <AHH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8F4A4F3C-63DD-4F66-B24C-952BBF52A728@.microsoft.com...
> Report.PageWidth - Report.LeftMargin - Report.Right Margin = 8
> My body.width is 3.5
> Thanks
>
> "Bruce Johnson [MSFT]" wrote:
>> Please make sure that your report is setup as follows:
>> Report.PageWidth - Report.LeftMargin - Report.Right Margin) >=>> Body.Width
>> --
>> Bruce Johnson [MSFT]
>> Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights.
>>
>> "AHH" <AHH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:CE79F248-E5B9-4500-84C6-5CB91195BA6C@.microsoft.com...
>> > Is there some sort of calculation to make a matrix export to pdf
>> > without
>> page breaks?
>> >
>> > I have
>> > 2 dynamic rows
>> > 1 dynamic column
>> > 1 value field
>> >
>> > Please help
>> >
>> > thanks
>> >
>>|||I made all of the column widths (the data) the same to no avail.
I also tried making the data conatained within the dynamic rows the same width in addition to making the dynamic column's data the same width and still get blank pages
from the documentation, the report should wrap to the next page
This only happens for PDF export - all other formats are fine
Still working on it
if you have anymore ideas please let me know - been at this for 30 hours now. :)
Later, allen|||I took this issue offline with AHH and was able to determine that a bug is
causing the problem.
ISSUE:
Periodically, blank pages are inserted into the a PDF rendering.
DISCUSSION:
The report that caused the problem contained a list that contained a matrix.
What appears to be occurring is that the list did not resize to the width of
the matrix - its width continued to expand until it was wider than the
report page width. At this point a blank page was inserted into the
rendering. If a workaround is discovered it will be posted on this thread. A
fix for this should appear in a future service pack or release.
--
Bruce Johnson [MSFT]
Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"AHH" <AHH@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CE79F248-E5B9-4500-84C6-5CB91195BA6C@.microsoft.com...
> Is there some sort of calculation to make a matrix export to pdf without
page breaks?
> I have
> 2 dynamic rows
> 1 dynamic column
> 1 value field
> Please help
> thanks
>

Matrix Last Column Sort Descending

I would like to sort the following matrix data:
July-07 Aug-07 Sep-07
Type A 5 1 4
Type B 6 3 3
Type C 4 2 6
Other 5 5 5
by the maximum date column (i.e. Sep), please note this month will
change each month
July-07 Aug-07 Sep-07
Type C 4 2 6
Type A 5 1 4
Type B 6 3 3
Other 5 5 5
I have tried the following in: Properties / Groups / Rows / Sorting
EXPRESSION
=IIF(Fields!Date.Value = Max(Fields!Date.Value), IIF(Fields!Type.Value
= "Other", -100, Fields!Amount.Value), -1000)
DIRECTION
Descending
With no success.
Any help would be greatly appreciated
Thanks
SarahOn Sep 19, 6:26 pm, sez...@.gmail.com wrote:
> I would like to sort the following matrix data:
> July-07 Aug-07 Sep-07
> Type A 5 1 4
> Type B 6 3 3
> Type C 4 2 6
> Other 5 5 5
> by the maximum date column (i.e. Sep), please note this month will
> change each month
> July-07 Aug-07 Sep-07
> Type C 4 2 6
> Type A 5 1 4
> Type B 6 3 3
> Other 5 5 5
> I have tried the following in: Properties / Groups / Rows / Sorting
> EXPRESSION
> =IIF(Fields!Date.Value = Max(Fields!Date.Value), IIF(Fields!Type.Value
> = "Other", -100, Fields!Amount.Value), -1000)
> DIRECTION
> Descending
> With no success.
> Any help would be greatly appreciated
> Thanks
> Sarah
If I understand you correctly, you might be able to get away with:
=iif(Fields!Date.Value = Max(Fields!Date.Value), Fields!
ValueField.Value, 0): Direction: Desc
If this does not work, you may need to sort based on an additional
field added to the returned dataset that has its value determined in
the stored procedure/query that is sourcing the report; possibly, via
cursor or while loop.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Enrique Martinez
Sr. Software Consultant|||Hi Enrique,
Thanks for you suggestions. I have now added a column into the SP
called Rank, this ranks the last months data by amount, I then try to
sort the ROW by Rank and still no success.
Thanks
Sarah|||On Sep 19, 11:45 pm, sez...@.gmail.com wrote:
> Hi Enrique,
> Thanks for you suggestions. I have now added a column into the SP
> called Rank, this ranks the last months data by amount, I then try to
> sort the ROW by Rank and still no success.
> Thanks
> Sarah
You're welcome. Are you sorting the main group in the matrix control
by the Rank column? If not, this might help.
Regards,
Enrique Martinez
Sr. Software Consultant|||Hi,
The Rank column is calucated in T-SQL, it is based on the amount
value, which is the coulmn of data in the matrix table. To add to my
worries, my chart is no longer working (which I think is related to
Rank), at least it's Friday :-)
Sarah|||All working this morning!
ORDER BY
Date DESC
Rank
in SP worked perfectly :-)
thanks for your help|||On Sep 23, 4:36 pm, sez...@.gmail.com wrote:
> All working this morning!
> ORDER BY
> Date DESC
> Rank
> in SP worked perfectly :-)
> thanks for your help
You're welcome. Let me know if I can be of further assistance.
Regards,
Enrique Martinez
Sr. Software Consultant

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Matching Collation and Sort

I am attempting to match the following collation and sort. I cannot seem to
make the right choices to prevent collation conflicts in my stored
procedures. Can ANYONE please give me some insight on what options to select
in order to match this in SQL 2000 Service pack 3? The server that produced
the info below (by running sp_helpsort) is a SQL 2000 SP3 server as well.
The closest I've been able to come at this point is to match everything
except the accent-sensative selection.
THANKS IN ADVANCE!
Skip
Latin1-General, case-insensitive, accent-sensitive, kanatype-insensitive,
width-insensitive for Unicode Data, SQL Server Sort Order 52 on Code Page
1252 for non-Unicode DataYou can run select serverproperty('Collation') to get the server collation
and select databasepropertyex('dbname','Collation') to get the database
collation. Have you moved a database from one server to another with a
different collation ?
--
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
http://www.sqldbatips.com
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.org
"Skip B" <skip@.theborlands.com> wrote in message
news:uA9$M9aUFHA.2124@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>I am attempting to match the following collation and sort. I cannot seem to
>make the right choices to prevent collation conflicts in my stored
>procedures. Can ANYONE please give me some insight on what options to
>select in order to match this in SQL 2000 Service pack 3? The server that
>produced the info below (by running sp_helpsort) is a SQL 2000 SP3 server
>as well.
> The closest I've been able to come at this point is to match everything
> except the accent-sensative selection.
> THANKS IN ADVANCE!
> Skip
> Latin1-General, case-insensitive, accent-sensitive, kanatype-insensitive,
> width-insensitive for Unicode Data, SQL Server Sort Order 52 on Code Page
> 1252 for non-Unicode Data
>|||Thanks Jasper. My issue is not identifying the collation. The issue is
matching the collation on a new sql box to which I will be moving the
database to. Notice the vagaries in the collation properties at the bottom
of my original note. There is no predefined collation in SQL that matches
this one nor can you get it right by using the collation designer. I know,
I've rebuilt the master on that thing numerous times now. The closest I've
been able to come is this:
Current Production Server:
Latin1-General, case-insensitive, accent-sensitive, kanatype-insensitive,
width-insensitive for Unicode Data, SQL Server Sort Order 52 on Code Page
1252 for non-Unicode Data
New (Soon to be I hope) Production Server
Latin1-General, case-insensitive, accent-insensitive, kanatype-insensitive,
width-insensitive for Unicode Data, SQL Server Sort Order 54 on Code Page
1252 for non-Unicode Data
Notice the accent-sensitivity and the SQL Server Sort order differences.
Also, when you use the collation designer there is no way to specify the SQL
Server Sort order either.
This is the problem I'm trying to address...Skip
"Jasper Smith" <jasper_smith9@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ejT%23BFcUFHA.1896@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> You can run select serverproperty('Collation') to get the server collation
> and select databasepropertyex('dbname','Collation') to get the database
> collation. Have you moved a database from one server to another with a
> different collation ?
> --
> HTH
> Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
> http://www.sqldbatips.com
> I support PASS - the definitive, global
> community for SQL Server professionals -
> http://www.sqlpass.org
> "Skip B" <skip@.theborlands.com> wrote in message
> news:uA9$M9aUFHA.2124@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>I am attempting to match the following collation and sort. I cannot seem
>>to make the right choices to prevent collation conflicts in my stored
>>procedures. Can ANYONE please give me some insight on what options to
>>select in order to match this in SQL 2000 Service pack 3? The server that
>>produced the info below (by running sp_helpsort) is a SQL 2000 SP3 server
>>as well.
>> The closest I've been able to come at this point is to match everything
>> except the accent-sensative selection.
>> THANKS IN ADVANCE!
>> Skip
>> Latin1-General, case-insensitive, accent-sensitive, kanatype-insensitive,
>> width-insensitive for Unicode Data, SQL Server Sort Order 52 on Code Page
>> 1252 for non-Unicode Data
>>
>|||I just installed a named instance and the output of sp_helpsort matches your
current production server and the collation I chose was
SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS (the default sql collation during install). The
descriptive collation description during install was (under the SQL
Collations bit) "Dictionary order,case-insensitive,for use with the 1252
Character set"
--
HTH
Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
http://www.sqldbatips.com
I support PASS - the definitive, global
community for SQL Server professionals -
http://www.sqlpass.org
"Skip B" <skip@.theborlands.com> wrote in message
news:eWw1aLcUFHA.2444@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
> Thanks Jasper. My issue is not identifying the collation. The issue is
> matching the collation on a new sql box to which I will be moving the
> database to. Notice the vagaries in the collation properties at the bottom
> of my original note. There is no predefined collation in SQL that matches
> this one nor can you get it right by using the collation designer. I know,
> I've rebuilt the master on that thing numerous times now. The closest I've
> been able to come is this:
>
> Current Production Server:
> Latin1-General, case-insensitive, accent-sensitive, kanatype-insensitive,
> width-insensitive for Unicode Data, SQL Server Sort Order 52 on Code Page
> 1252 for non-Unicode Data
> New (Soon to be I hope) Production Server
> Latin1-General, case-insensitive, accent-insensitive,
> kanatype-insensitive,
> width-insensitive for Unicode Data, SQL Server Sort Order 54 on Code Page
> 1252 for non-Unicode Data
> Notice the accent-sensitivity and the SQL Server Sort order differences.
> Also, when you use the collation designer there is no way to specify the
> SQL Server Sort order either.
> This is the problem I'm trying to address...Skip
>
>
> "Jasper Smith" <jasper_smith9@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ejT%23BFcUFHA.1896@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> You can run select serverproperty('Collation') to get the server
>> collation and select databasepropertyex('dbname','Collation') to get the
>> database collation. Have you moved a database from one server to another
>> with a different collation ?
>> --
>> HTH
>> Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
>> http://www.sqldbatips.com
>> I support PASS - the definitive, global
>> community for SQL Server professionals -
>> http://www.sqlpass.org
>> "Skip B" <skip@.theborlands.com> wrote in message
>> news:uA9$M9aUFHA.2124@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>I am attempting to match the following collation and sort. I cannot seem
>>to make the right choices to prevent collation conflicts in my stored
>>procedures. Can ANYONE please give me some insight on what options to
>>select in order to match this in SQL 2000 Service pack 3? The server that
>>produced the info below (by running sp_helpsort) is a SQL 2000 SP3 server
>>as well.
>> The closest I've been able to come at this point is to match everything
>> except the accent-sensative selection.
>> THANKS IN ADVANCE!
>> Skip
>> Latin1-General, case-insensitive, accent-sensitive,
>> kanatype-insensitive, width-insensitive for Unicode Data, SQL Server
>> Sort Order 52 on Code Page 1252 for non-Unicode Data
>>
>>
>|||Great. I'm rebuilding the master now. I'll let you know shortly. Thanks!
"Jasper Smith" <jasper_smith9@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OKFG0WcUFHA.628@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>I just installed a named instance and the output of sp_helpsort matches
>your current production server and the collation I chose was
>SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS (the default sql collation during install).
>The descriptive collation description during install was (under the SQL
>Collations bit) "Dictionary order,case-insensitive,for use with the 1252
>Character set"
> --
> HTH
> Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
> http://www.sqldbatips.com
> I support PASS - the definitive, global
> community for SQL Server professionals -
> http://www.sqlpass.org
> "Skip B" <skip@.theborlands.com> wrote in message
> news:eWw1aLcUFHA.2444@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>
>> Thanks Jasper. My issue is not identifying the collation. The issue is
>> matching the collation on a new sql box to which I will be moving the
>> database to. Notice the vagaries in the collation properties at the
>> bottom of my original note. There is no predefined collation in SQL that
>> matches this one nor can you get it right by using the collation
>> designer. I know, I've rebuilt the master on that thing numerous times
>> now. The closest I've been able to come is this:
>>
>> Current Production Server:
>> Latin1-General, case-insensitive, accent-sensitive, kanatype-insensitive,
>> width-insensitive for Unicode Data, SQL Server Sort Order 52 on Code Page
>> 1252 for non-Unicode Data
>> New (Soon to be I hope) Production Server
>> Latin1-General, case-insensitive, accent-insensitive,
>> kanatype-insensitive,
>> width-insensitive for Unicode Data, SQL Server Sort Order 54 on Code Page
>> 1252 for non-Unicode Data
>> Notice the accent-sensitivity and the SQL Server Sort order differences.
>> Also, when you use the collation designer there is no way to specify the
>> SQL Server Sort order either.
>> This is the problem I'm trying to address...Skip
>>
>>
>> "Jasper Smith" <jasper_smith9@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:ejT%23BFcUFHA.1896@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> You can run select serverproperty('Collation') to get the server
>> collation and select databasepropertyex('dbname','Collation') to get the
>> database collation. Have you moved a database from one server to another
>> with a different collation ?
>> --
>> HTH
>> Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
>> http://www.sqldbatips.com
>> I support PASS - the definitive, global
>> community for SQL Server professionals -
>> http://www.sqlpass.org
>> "Skip B" <skip@.theborlands.com> wrote in message
>> news:uA9$M9aUFHA.2124@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>I am attempting to match the following collation and sort. I cannot seem
>>to make the right choices to prevent collation conflicts in my stored
>>procedures. Can ANYONE please give me some insight on what options to
>>select in order to match this in SQL 2000 Service pack 3? The server
>>that produced the info below (by running sp_helpsort) is a SQL 2000 SP3
>>server as well.
>> The closest I've been able to come at this point is to match everything
>> except the accent-sensative selection.
>> THANKS IN ADVANCE!
>> Skip
>> Latin1-General, case-insensitive, accent-sensitive,
>> kanatype-insensitive, width-insensitive for Unicode Data, SQL Server
>> Sort Order 52 on Code Page 1252 for non-Unicode Data
>>
>>
>>
>|||Done deal. Thanks for your help, Jasper...Skip
"Skip B" <skip@.theborlands.com> wrote in message
news:unFmOjcUFHA.2124@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Great. I'm rebuilding the master now. I'll let you know shortly. Thanks!
>
> "Jasper Smith" <jasper_smith9@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:OKFG0WcUFHA.628@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>I just installed a named instance and the output of sp_helpsort matches
>>your current production server and the collation I chose was
>>SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS (the default sql collation during install).
>>The descriptive collation description during install was (under the SQL
>>Collations bit) "Dictionary order,case-insensitive,for use with the 1252
>>Character set"
>> --
>> HTH
>> Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
>> http://www.sqldbatips.com
>> I support PASS - the definitive, global
>> community for SQL Server professionals -
>> http://www.sqlpass.org
>> "Skip B" <skip@.theborlands.com> wrote in message
>> news:eWw1aLcUFHA.2444@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>
>> Thanks Jasper. My issue is not identifying the collation. The issue is
>> matching the collation on a new sql box to which I will be moving the
>> database to. Notice the vagaries in the collation properties at the
>> bottom of my original note. There is no predefined collation in SQL that
>> matches this one nor can you get it right by using the collation
>> designer. I know, I've rebuilt the master on that thing numerous times
>> now. The closest I've been able to come is this:
>>
>> Current Production Server:
>> Latin1-General, case-insensitive, accent-sensitive,
>> kanatype-insensitive,
>> width-insensitive for Unicode Data, SQL Server Sort Order 52 on Code
>> Page
>> 1252 for non-Unicode Data
>> New (Soon to be I hope) Production Server
>> Latin1-General, case-insensitive, accent-insensitive,
>> kanatype-insensitive,
>> width-insensitive for Unicode Data, SQL Server Sort Order 54 on Code
>> Page
>> 1252 for non-Unicode Data
>> Notice the accent-sensitivity and the SQL Server Sort order differences.
>> Also, when you use the collation designer there is no way to specify the
>> SQL Server Sort order either.
>> This is the problem I'm trying to address...Skip
>>
>>
>> "Jasper Smith" <jasper_smith9@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:ejT%23BFcUFHA.1896@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> You can run select serverproperty('Collation') to get the server
>> collation and select databasepropertyex('dbname','Collation') to get
>> the database collation. Have you moved a database from one server to
>> another with a different collation ?
>> --
>> HTH
>> Jasper Smith (SQL Server MVP)
>> http://www.sqldbatips.com
>> I support PASS - the definitive, global
>> community for SQL Server professionals -
>> http://www.sqlpass.org
>> "Skip B" <skip@.theborlands.com> wrote in message
>> news:uA9$M9aUFHA.2124@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>I am attempting to match the following collation and sort. I cannot
>>seem to make the right choices to prevent collation conflicts in my
>>stored procedures. Can ANYONE please give me some insight on what
>>options to select in order to match this in SQL 2000 Service pack 3?
>>The server that produced the info below (by running sp_helpsort) is a
>>SQL 2000 SP3 server as well.
>> The closest I've been able to come at this point is to match
>> everything except the accent-sensative selection.
>> THANKS IN ADVANCE!
>> Skip
>> Latin1-General, case-insensitive, accent-sensitive,
>> kanatype-insensitive, width-insensitive for Unicode Data, SQL Server
>> Sort Order 52 on Code Page 1252 for non-Unicode Data
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Max Count(*) question

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Matrix Sorting

Monday, March 19, 2012

Matrix PDF

Matrix Last Column Sort Descending

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Matching Collation and Sort

Matching Collation and Sort

Matching Collation and Sort

master sysmessages

Blog Archive

About Me