SQLServerCentral / Article Discussions / Article Discussions by Author / Discuss content posted by VM / Rules! / Latest Posts

RE: Rules!

L' Eomot Inversé — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 19:29:31 GMT

[quote][b]RBarryYoung (12/5/2009)[/b][hr]Yes, could we [i][b]please[/b][/i] stop asking QotD's that only have correct answers for SQL Server 2000?[/quote]Perhaps instead we could ensure that all questins specify which resions (7, 2K0, 2K5, or 2K8) the apply to? I seem to recall that people used to do this when it made a difference, but it seems top be done less often now. Or am I just imagining it?

RE: Rules!

L' Eomot Inversé — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 19:26:20 GMT

[quote][b]Scott Coleman (11/20/2009)[/b][hr]You could quibble that the complete rule is not stored in sysobjects, since the rule definition is in syscomments. But sysobjects is the best answer of the choices given.[/quote]I'm afraid that choosing the least wrong of several wrong answers is too often the only way of getting the "correct" answer to "Today's Question". I wish that would change.

RE: Rules!

David Burrows — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:14:57 GMT

[quote][b]RBarryYoung (12/5/2009)[/b][hr]Yes, could we [i][b]please[/b][/i] stop asking QotD's that only have correct answers for SQL Server 2000?[/quote]Now that is nit-picking :-P

RE: Rules!

RBarryYoung — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 21:48:42 GMT

Yes, could we [i][b]please[/b][/i] stop asking QotD's that only have correct answers for SQL Server 2000?

RE: Rules!

BudaCli — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 02:33:51 GMT

Beaten but a leeson learned should never be learned again.

RE: Rules!

Scott Coleman — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 07:46:40 GMT

You could quibble that the complete rule is not stored in sysobjects, since the rule definition is in syscomments. But sysobjects is the best answer of the choices given.

RE: Rules!

Bhavesh_Patel — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 22:00:34 GMT

Hey this was easy one. Hope for more such easy Q's in future! :-D

RE: Rules!

SQLRNNR — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:28:25 GMT

While these are valid arguments about nit-picking of questions, one vital piece of information was overlooked. This question was only worth 1 point.Bitbucket, your question was worth more points. Had it only been 1 point, there would have been far less picking.

RE: Rules!

Hugo Kornelis — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 13:58:42 GMT

[quote][b]bitbucket-25253 (11/19/2009)[/b][hr]Having recently gotten my brains beat out, my integrity questioned, my intelligence derided and other wise vilified (Refer to the QOD 11/17/2009 forum). I am greatly surprised that the little bitty nitpickers are not raging here in this forum, perhaps it is because they do not intimately know enough about SQL Server or since they got the message they so dearly love to see, that is "You got it right".But let me point out a technicality: The question asked which of these [b]views[/b] would you query. The correct answer as given is sysobjects.Now for the sorry bit of fact the displayed item: sysobjects is a [b]SYSTEM TABLE[/b]The [b]VIEW[/b] is sys.sysobjects. Which of course contains essentially the same data as does the system table. To be more specific it is defined as a CATALOG VIEW, but a view nevertheless.[/quote]If you are going to pick nits, make sure you get your facts right. :-PIn SQL Server 2000 and older versions, sysobjects was indeed a system table. But as of SQL Server 2005, system tables are no longer exposed. They have been replaced by system views, of which sys.objects (that is, the view named objects in the schema named sys) is an example.To preserve compatibility with older versions, a second set of views, the so-called compatibility views, were introduced. One of those views is sys.sysobjects. And to preserve full compatibility, SQL Server will find this view even if you omit the schema name and shorten it to just sysobjects.So, unless you assumed the question to be about SQL Server 2000 or before, you picked the wrong nit. For in all current versions of SQL Server, sysobjects is indeed a view, not a table.The true nitpicker though, would have complained about something else - and that is that the real true answer is not included. Books Online includes a note with all compatibility views that these will be removed in a future version of SQL Server, and that the current SQL Server system views should be used instead. So the only really correct answer would have been to query the sys.objects view.

RE: Rules!

bitbucket-25253 — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 12:07:20 GMT

Having recently gotten my brains beat out, my integrity questioned, my intelligence derided and other wise vilified (Refer to the QOD 11/17/2009 forum). I am greatly surprised that the little bitty nitpickers are not raging here in this forum, perhaps it is because they do not intimately know enough about SQL Server or since they got the message they so dearly love to see, that is "You got it right".But let me point out a technicality: The question asked which of these [b]views[/b] would you query. The correct answer as given is sysobjects.Now for the sorry bit of fact the displayed item: sysobjects is a [b]SYSTEM TABLE[/b]The [b]VIEW[/b] is sys.sysobjects. Which of course contains essentially the same data as does the system table. To be more specific it is defined as a CATALOG VIEW, but a view nevertheless.Now this should not be attributed as an effort to denigrate the author of this QOD, knowing how hard it is to compose an "acceptable" QOD.VM-723206 I congratulate you on your adroit side stepping the nit pickers.

RE: Rules!

SanjayAttray — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 09:10:04 GMT

sysrules in option. Good way to Trick. Never seen object like this.

Rules!

VM-723206 — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:15:31 GMT

Comments posted to this topic are about the item [B]Rules![/B]