SQLServerCentral / Article Discussions / Article Discussions by Author / Discuss content posted by Mohammed Moinudheen / ROWGUIDCOL / Latest Posts

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

Duncan Pryde — Thu, 10 Mar 2011 01:13:47 GMT

[quote][b]Tom.Thomson (3/9/2011)[/b][hr]Most of the time no-one bothers to be precise - the common feeling is something like "what's the point of complete precision" (except when writing about mathematical logic, or formally provable correctness of algorithms, or that sort of thing) - but in QOTD we unfortunately see a trick question now and again and as a result any imprecision (no matter how slight) risks being interpreted very carefully, unlike normal everyday speech or writing - just look at the number of comments saying something like "I got it wrong because I thought it was a trick question" or of really ludicrous things like the recent suggestion that the use of the word "drive" in one of Steve's RAID questions made it into trick a question.[/quote]You've hit the nail on the head there. It's certainly not easy writing questions - or anything for that matter - in such a way as to guarantee being understood correctly by everyone. After all, our language skills as humans are geared for speech, where imprecision doesn't matter as much since you can always explain yourself afterwards.And it's not just QOTD - I've seen a number of questions on Microsoft certification exams where I've thought "If I interpret it this way its 'A', but if I interpret it the other way it's 'B'". In the end I have to go for what I felt was the most likely interpretation to make it a decent question and hope that's correct.So I do admire anyone that writes questions here, and as someone who does so myself the ensuing discussions are always useful for me to learn how I could have improved the format or wording of the question to avoid being misunderstood.Duncan

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

L' Eomot Inversé — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 22:48:26 GMT

[quote][b]SanDroid (3/9/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]Duncan Pryde (3/9/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]SanDroid (3/9/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]Tom.Thomson (3/8/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]SanDroid (3/8/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]Tom.Thomson (3/8/2011)[/b][hr]The right answer of course is "each of them can (but only one at a time)" so of the options provided 3 is closest to correct. 1 (the "right" answer) would only be [i]really[/i] correct if the question was "how many of them can be rowguidcol columns at the same time".[/quote]I have to agree to disagree with this statement."enabled" is the key word in this question and makes perfect english as the last word in the question. This makes it the main describer for the question. [/quote]I don't think the word "enabled" helps at all. The way the question is phrased would allow it to help only if the word "simultaneously" were inserted between "can" and "have" (or after "enabled" if a little sloppiness is permitted).[/quote]My point was that the english in the question is correct. This type of question and it's wording is very common on all tests taken here in North America. I can't verify that they are like this in other regions where English is the primary language.:cool:FYI: That coins question ther other user asked you is in both of my daughters SAT study guides. If it makes you feel any better I had to explain it to them also.[/quote]Just to add my £0.02-worth:Duncan[/quote]Duncan,You are correct in all your statements. Unforetunately none of them had anytihng to do with the fact that the question was not incorrect in its use of the english laguage. Only one can actually be enabled.[/quote]I don't suppose it will help you understand what I was saying if I point out that the person who introduced the term "incorrect" into this discussion was you, not me, that as I understand the language "imprecise" does not mean "incorrect" (it is imprecise to say "my bungalow is about 100 metres from the sea", but it certainly is not incorrect), and that in my view there was absolutely no incorrect use of English in the question or in the answer, just imprecise use. The wording of the question was imprecise, in that in permitted more than one interpretation, and although it seemed pretty obvious which meaning the author intended (unless he was playing trick questions; and he wasn't, so that was his meaning) a different interpretation was perfectly reasonable.Most of the time no-one bothers to be precise - the common feeling is something like "what's the point of complete precision" (except when writing about mathematical logic, or formally provable correctness of algorithms, or that sort of thing) - but in QOTD we unfortunately see a trick question now and again and as a result any imprecision (no matter how slight) risks being interpreted very carefully, unlike normal everyday speech or writing - just look at the number of comments saying something like "I got it wrong because I thought it was a trick question" or of really ludicrous things like the recent suggestion that the use of the word "drive" in one of Steve's RAID questions made it into trick a question.

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

Duncan Pryde — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 08:28:29 GMT

[quote][b]SanDroid (3/9/2011)[/b][hr]Duncan,You are correct in all your statements. Unforetunately none of them had anytihng to do with the fact that the question was not incorrect in its use of the english laguage. Only one can actually be enabled.[/quote]It wasn't incorrect English, no, but could be interpreted in a couple of ways. Just like my question today, apparently. ;-)

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

SanDroid — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 08:16:53 GMT

[quote][b]Duncan Pryde (3/9/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]SanDroid (3/9/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]Tom.Thomson (3/8/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]SanDroid (3/8/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]Tom.Thomson (3/8/2011)[/b][hr]The right answer of course is "each of them can (but only one at a time)" so of the options provided 3 is closest to correct. 1 (the "right" answer) would only be [i]really[/i] correct if the question was "how many of them can be rowguidcol columns at the same time".[/quote]I have to agree to disagree with this statement."enabled" is the key word in this question and makes perfect english as the last word in the question. This makes it the main describer for the question. [/quote]I don't think the word "enabled" helps at all. The way the question is phrased would allow it to help only if the word "simultaneously" were inserted between "can" and "have" (or after "enabled" if a little sloppiness is permitted).[/quote]My point was that the english in the question is correct. This type of question and it's wording is very common on all tests taken here in North America. I can't verify that they are like this in other regions where English is the primary language.:cool:FYI: That coins question ther other user asked you is in both of my daughters SAT study guides. If it makes you feel any better I had to explain it to them also.[/quote]Just to add my £0.02-worth:Duncan[/quote]Duncan,You are correct in all your statements. Unforetunately none of them had anytihng to do with the fact that the question was not incorrect in its use of the english laguage. Only one can actually be enabled.

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

Duncan Pryde — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 08:11:37 GMT

[quote][b]SanDroid (3/9/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]Tom.Thomson (3/8/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]SanDroid (3/8/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]Tom.Thomson (3/8/2011)[/b][hr]The right answer of course is "each of them can (but only one at a time)" so of the options provided 3 is closest to correct. 1 (the "right" answer) would only be [i]really[/i] correct if the question was "how many of them can be rowguidcol columns at the same time".[/quote]I have to agree to disagree with this statement."enabled" is the key word in this question and makes perfect english as the last word in the question. This makes it the main describer for the question. [/quote]I don't think the word "enabled" helps at all. The way the question is phrased would allow it to help only if the word "simultaneously" were inserted between "can" and "have" (or after "enabled" if a little sloppiness is permitted).[/quote]My point was that the english in the question is correct. This type of question and it's wording is very common on all tests taken here in North America. I can't verify that they are like this in other regions where English is the primary language.:cool:FYI: That coins question ther other user asked you is in both of my daughters SAT study guides. If it makes you feel any better I had to explain it to them also.[/quote]Just to add my £0.02-worth:When I read the question ("how many of them can have the ROWGUIDCOL property enabled") I must have automatically assumed the "at the same time/at any one time" part, because until I read Tom's comments it never occurred to me to interpret it any other way. However, since Tom did interpret it that way, it is therefore ipso facto (and so on) possible to interpret it that way. If it weren't possible to interpret it that way, Tom wouldn't have interpreted it that way and we wouldn't be having this discussion. QED. :-PSo while for me, the question made perfect sense, I can also see that it might not make perfect sense for everyone, and therefore there is an argument to be made that it could have been improved by adding "at the same time" to the end of the question. Although I still thought it was a jolly good question.Having written a few questions myself now, I realise how difficult it is to get the question right so that everyone interprets it the way you meant it, but that's all part of the fun and the learning process!Duncan

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

SanDroid — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 07:38:02 GMT

[quote][b]Tom.Thomson (3/8/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]SanDroid (3/8/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]Tom.Thomson (3/8/2011)[/b][hr]The right answer of course is "each of them can (but only one at a time)" so of the options provided 3 is closest to correct. 1 (the "right" answer) would only be [i]really[/i] correct if the question was "how many of them can be rowguidcol columns at the same time".[/quote]I have to agree to disagree with this statement."enabled" is the key word in this question and makes perfect english as the last word in the question. This makes it the main describer for the question. [/quote]I don't think the word "enabled" helps at all. The way the question is phrased would allow it to help only if the word "simultaneously" were inserted between "can" and "have" (or after "enabled" if a little sloppiness is permitted).[/quote]My point was that the english in the question is correct. This type of question and it's wording is very common on all tests taken here in North America. I can't verify that they are like this in other regions where English is the primary language.:cool:FYI: That coins question ther other user asked you is in both of my daughters SAT study guides. If it makes you feel any better I had to explain it to them also.

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

john.arnott — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 22:24:33 GMT

[quote][b]Tom.Thomson (3/8/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]john.arnott (3/8/2011)[/b][hr]Tom, you've shown that you'd never have trouble with this riddle: If I have two American coins with a total value of 30 cents and one of them is not a quarter, what are they?[/quote]No, I might have trouble with that one.[/quote]The answer I was thinking of is "a quarter and a nickle". The riddle postulates that one of the coins is not a quarter, and that is demonstrably true; one coin is a nickle and the [b]other [/b]coin is a quarter. Of course, the point here is that the form of the question (calling it a riddle) sets up thought parameters for most people. They won't consider it a trivia quiz, but rather an exercise in flexible thinking. The question is deliberately fuzzy in its language and, of course, that's part of the amusement factor in solving (or hearing) the "answer".

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

L' Eomot Inversé — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 18:23:27 GMT

[quote][b]john.arnott (3/8/2011)[/b][hr]Tom, you've shown that you'd never have trouble with this riddle: If I have two American coins with a total value of 30 cents and one of them is not a quarter, what are they?[/quote]No, I might have trouble with that one.The first problem there is that it depends whether the "value" referred to is "face value" or "what you can sell them for"; a modern dime and an 1878 silver 20 cent piece have the right face value, but you could sell them for rather a lot more; and maybe two old century coins with a total face value of a lot less than 30 cents could be sold for 30 cents. So I don't know whether the answer is " an old 20 cent coin and a dime" or "you can't do that" or "an old 3 cent piece and an old half dime" (I suspect that the last is worth a lot more than 30 cents, but it illustrates the point). Or maybe it's something else altogether - I don't really know about American coinage, and of course Canadian coinage is different again (for example they had 20 cent coins about 20 years befor the USA did and dropped them 6 years before the US had them) and I haven't a clue which countries of Central or South America (or the Caribbean) ever had coins denominated in cents.My best guess would be that the "right" answer to the riddle is "forgeries", but there's a good chance that I would be completely wrong.So I definitely have trouble with that riddle.

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

L' Eomot Inversé — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 18:03:32 GMT

[quote][b]SanDroid (3/8/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]Tom.Thomson (3/8/2011)[/b][hr]The right answer of course is "each of them can (but only one at a time)" so of the options provided 3 is closest to correct. 1 (the "right" answer) would only be [i]really[/i] correct if the question was "how many of them can be rowguidcol columns at the same time".[/quote]I have to agree to disagree with this statement."enabled" is the key word in this question and makes perfect english as the last word in the question. This makes it the main describer for the question. [/quote]I don't think the word "enabled" helps at all. The way the question is phrased would allow it to help only if the word "simultaneously" were inserted between "can" and "have" (or after "enabled" if a little sloppiness is permitted).

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

UMG Developer — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 12:14:31 GMT

Thanks for the question, I did have to go read in BOL to figure out how to answer it, so I learned something.

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

SQLRNNR — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 11:53:02 GMT

Thanks for the question.

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

SQLRNNR — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 11:52:40 GMT

[quote][b]Daniel Bowlin (3/8/2011)[/b][hr]I guess my question is, once you have a GUID, what is the point of the other unique columns?[/quote]Sadly, there are numerous products that use it as the PK as well as FKs in child tables. Thus there would be several GUIDs. One example of such a product is Microsoft Dynamics CRM.

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

john.arnott — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 11:04:07 GMT

[quote][b]Tom.Thomson (3/8/2011)[/b][hr]Interesting question. There is however a problem with use of imprecise English - this is of course sheer nit-picking, and I'm not complaining because I guessed that the chances were better than even that imprecise English was being used so that I got it "right" by deliberately selecting an answer I knew to be wrong.The right answer of course is "each of them can (but only one at a time)" so of the options provided 3 is closest to correct. 1 (the "right" answer) would only be [i]really[/i] correct if the question was "how many of them can be rowguidcol columns at the same time".[/quote]Tom, you've shown that you'd never have trouble with this riddle: If I have two American coins with a total value of 30 cents and one of them is not a quarter, what are they?

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

mohammed moinudheen — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 10:14:48 GMT

[quote][b]Daniel Bowlin (3/8/2011)[/b][hr]I guess my question is, once you have a GUID, what is the point of the other unique columns?[/quote]I think there is no point in adding other unique colums. I just happened to read about GUID's and thought of this question.

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

Surii — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 09:56:40 GMT

nice and easy one..

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

Daniel Bowlin — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 08:45:30 GMT

I guess my question is, once you have a GUID, what is the point of the other unique columns?

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

SanDroid — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 07:50:52 GMT

[quote][b]Tom.Thomson (3/8/2011)[/b][hr]The right answer of course is "each of them can (but only one at a time)" so of the options provided 3 is closest to correct. 1 (the "right" answer) would only be [i]really[/i] correct if the question was "how many of them can be rowguidcol columns at the same time".[/quote]I have to agree to disagree with this statement."enabled" is the key word in this question and makes perfect english as the last word in the question. This makes it the main describer for the question. You can "enable" ROWGUIDCOL on any UID column in a table, but it can only be "enabled" on one row.When something is done and the switch is on it is [b][i][u]enabled[/u][/i][/b]. The concept I learned from the question is that enabling ROWGUID on any column automaticly disables it on all other columns when using Table Designer.When being done from a script the DDL you have to use to make another column the ROWGUIDCOL really brings home why the question makes perfect sense.Create a table called Table_1 give it three UID columns and set the first or second one to ROWGUID. CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Table_1]( [uid01] [uniqueidentifier] ROWGUIDCOL NULL, [uid02] [uniqueidentifier] NULL, [uid03] [uniqueidentifier] NULL) ON [PRIMARY]ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Table_1] ADD CONSTRAINT [DF_Table_1_uid01] DEFAULT (newid()) FOR [uid01]ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Table_1] ADD CONSTRAINT [DF_Table_1_uid02] DEFAULT (newid()) FOR [uid02]ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Table_1] ADD CONSTRAINT [DF_Table_1_uid03] DEFAULT (newid()) FOR [uid03]GONow try to Alter the table and set any other column to ROWGUID.ALTER TABLE dbo.Table_1 ALTER COLUMN uid02 ADD ROWGUIDCOLGOIt can't be done because ROWGUIDCOL is already enabled on another COLUMN and it can only be enabled on ONE column. This looks really wierd when using the querry designer becuase it will let you select YES to the option on any column, but it is only enabled on the last one you pick.Try it out.BEGIN TRANSACTIONALTER TABLE dbo.Table_1 ALTER COLUMN uid03 DROP ROWGUIDCOLGOALTER TABLE dbo.Table_1 ALTER COLUMN uid02 ADD ROWGUIDCOLGOCOMMITSo lets read the qustion again:How many UID columns in a table can have ROWGUIDCOL enabled?You can enable it on any UID column in a table, but it can only be [b][i][u]enabled[/u][/i][/b] on one column.One last thing to point out about ROWGUIDCOL property is that differant from an Identity Column, the Object explorer gives you no clues about which column has ROWGUIDCOL enabled.

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

Koen Verbeeck — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 07:25:10 GMT

[quote][b]Tom.Thomson (3/8/2011)[/b][hr]Interesting question. There is however a problem with use of imprecise English - this is of course sheer nit-picking, and I'm not complaining because I guessed that the chances were better than even that imprecise English was being used so that I got it "right" by deliberately selecting an answer I knew to be wrong.The right answer of course is "each of them can (but only one at a time)" so of the options provided 3 is closest to correct. 1 (the "right" answer) would only be [i]really[/i] correct if the question was "how many of them can be rowguidcol columns at the same time".[/quote]You are right, it is sheer nit-picking :-)However, it does not make your point less valid...

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

L' Eomot Inversé — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 07:18:28 GMT

Interesting question. There is however a problem with use of imprecise English - this is of course sheer nit-picking, and I'm not complaining because I guessed that the chances were better than even that imprecise English was being used so that I got it "right" by deliberately selecting an answer I knew to be wrong.The right answer of course is "each of them can (but only one at a time)" so of the options provided 3 is closest to correct. 1 (the "right" answer) would only be [i]really[/i] correct if the question was "how many of them can be rowguidcol columns at the same time".

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

SanDroid — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 07:16:32 GMT

Great question. Easy is nice for many reasons. I can't be the only one appreciating the easy questions on Fat Tuesday.I wonder if the 5% that answered 0 thought is was about the query optimizer?:w00t::-P:w00t:

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

Duncan Pryde — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 03:15:24 GMT

[quote][b]Toreador (3/8/2011)[/b][hr][quote][b]mohammed moinudheen (3/7/2011)[/b][hr]Thank you Ron. Seems to be easy, most of them got it right :-)[/quote]Only 80% at the moment.I'm intrigued about the 2% who answered "2" ;-)[/quote]Almost as intriguing is the 5% who answered "0" - maybe they thought it was a trick question?!!

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

Toreador — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 02:56:11 GMT

[quote][b]mohammed moinudheen (3/7/2011)[/b][hr]Thank you Ron. Seems to be easy, most of them got it right :-)[/quote]Only 80% at the moment.I'm intrigued about the 2% who answered "2" ;-)

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

Koen Verbeeck — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 02:05:12 GMT

Nice and easy, thank you very much.(Easy is not a bad thing, it is good for one's self esteem that it is not necessary to dive into BOL to find an answer :-))

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

mohammed moinudheen — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 01:31:30 GMT

Thank you Duncan for the feedback.

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

Duncan Pryde — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 01:18:17 GMT

[quote][b]mohammed moinudheen (3/7/2011)[/b][hr]Thank you Ron. Seems to be easy, most of them got it right :-)[/quote]Not necessarily a bad thing - it means people have understood the question and what it is asking, for a start.Thanks for the question, I learned something new.Duncan

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

mohammed moinudheen — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 23:41:59 GMT

Thank you Ron. Seems to be easy, most of them got it right :-)

RE: ROWGUIDCOL

bitbucket-25253 — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 20:37:07 GMT

Good question ... thanks

ROWGUIDCOL

mohammed moinudheen — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 20:36:26 GMT

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