SQLServerCentral / Discuss Content Posted by Steve Jones / Article Discussions / Article Discussions by Author / Noise / Latest Posts

RE: Noise

MisplacedChildhood — Wed, 24 Oct 2012 11:48:50 GMT

[quote][b]Hugo Kornelis (10/16/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]okbangas (10/16/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]kapil190588 (10/15/2012)[/b][hr]As sql server version was not specified so I selected NoiseList but got wrong...I think version should be mentioned in question..learn new thing today.......[/quote]If it were different in two supported editions of SQL Server, I agree. However, SQL Server 2005 is not supported anymore, so this question is correct for all supported editions of SQL Server.[/quote]When I saw the question and the list of answers, I *knew* there would be debate over this.However, I agree with Okbangas - the question is fine without mentioning the version. And not just because SQL Server 2005 is out of date. I might have at least somewhat concurred with Kapil if that were the only argument. However, the "correct" answer for SQL Server 2005 and before was not included.In SQL Server 2005, the words to be ignored were called "noise words". But lists of those words were not ever called "noise lists" - they were called "noise word files". So even those who have only experience with SQL Server 2005 and prior should have been able to realize that a name change had happened, and that they needed to do more research.I think this was a great question, Steve! :-)[/quote]I, like Hugo, knew it used to be noise words, but then I got a feeling somthing changed! Glad I read up and got it right

RE: Noise

Iulian -207023 — Tue, 23 Oct 2012 02:10:56 GMT

Thank you for the question, good to see one on full text indexingIulian

RE: Noise

kapil_kk — Sat, 20 Oct 2012 00:10:45 GMT

good explanation

RE: Noise

kapil_kk — Wed, 17 Oct 2012 01:11:37 GMT

thanks for the explanation from all you guys..

RE: Noise

Koen Verbeeck — Wed, 17 Oct 2012 00:42:40 GMT

Nice question, thanks!

RE: Noise

@Cassie — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:39:10 GMT

Mention SQL version anyway!

RE: Noise

SQLRNNR — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:16:34 GMT

[quote][b]Steve Jones - SSC Editor (10/16/2012)[/b][hr]...We can't build questions that are completely backwards compatible. [/quote]+1

RE: Noise

sestell1 — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:16:25 GMT

[quote][b]Michael Valentine Jones (10/16/2012)[/b][hr]Specifying the versions would be good because it's hard to tell years later which versions an old question was meant for.[/quote]Hmm, that's a pretty good point actually. It makes sense to assume the current version of SQL Server with default settings for the current question, but that's something that could become unclear over time should older questions come up in a search (or if you are answering old questions in your spare time).

RE: Noise

Michael Valentine Jones — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:11:21 GMT

Specifying the versions would be good because it's hard to tell years later which versions an old question was meant for.

RE: Noise

Steve Jones - SSC Editor — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 08:51:55 GMT

[quote][b]Aleksl-294755 (10/16/2012)[/b][hr]I concur with kapil190588 that the version should somehow be mentioned.Please see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms142551(v=sql.90).aspx - noise-word list (LIST!)[/quote]Not the same thing, and it's not current terminology. If you were to talk to anyone today about FTS, Stop lists would be the term used, regardless of what was in place in 2005. That document also references noise word files, and noise word lists, not noise lists. I would say that based on my experience working with the versions, the "noise word list" is a typo in that documentation. We can't build questions that are completely backwards compatible.

RE: Noise

call.copse — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 07:56:18 GMT

Bah humbug - by which you may take it that I had not kept up on this subject. I would have researched it if the version had been specified as I had not realised it was a change. I think including the version would have made it less 'trick'-y.

RE: Noise

mbova407 — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 07:41:26 GMT

Thanks Easy Question.

RE: Noise

mtassin — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 06:46:18 GMT

I knew what they were, but I couldn't remember the nomenclature. So I popped open BOL and searched for noise words. Which took me to the stopwords area and then I didn't bother to read very hard (forgot coffee).Ah well... getting it wrong when you're on the right answer but too tired to read, gives you what you deserver I suppose.

RE: Noise

sestell1 — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 06:46:06 GMT

Nice question! I would have gotten this wrong without some research. The name seems counter-intuitive, doesn't it?

RE: Noise

Ernie Schlangen — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 06:43:21 GMT

[quote][b]kapil_kk (10/15/2012)[/b][hr]As sql server version was not specified so I selected NoiseList but got wrong...I think version should be mentioned in question..learn new thing today.......[/quote]+1

RE: Noise

Paul White — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 06:09:22 GMT

RE: Noise

Aleksl-294755 — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 06:00:27 GMT

I concur with kapil190588 that the version should somehow be mentioned.Please see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms142551(v=sql.90).aspx - noise-word list (LIST!)

RE: Noise

Rich Weissler — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 04:47:12 GMT

[quote][b]L' Eomot Inversé (10/16/2012)[/b]QotD refers to SQL Server versions currently under full support, not those under extended support[/quote]Excellent. Thank you.And, of course, good question today.

RE: Noise

(Bob Brown) — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 04:09:27 GMT

Thanks for the question.

RE: Noise

L' Eomot Inversé — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 03:47:06 GMT

[quote][b]Rich Weissler (10/16/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]okbangas (10/16/2012)[/b][hr]If it were different in two supported editions of SQL Server, I agree. However, SQL Server 2005 is not supported anymore, so this question is correct for all supported editions of SQL Server.[/quote]I didn't realize SQLServerCentral had support dates too. [url=http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/en/us/support/support-updates.aspx]Microsoft has SQL 2000 on Extended Support for another six months or so[/url], and SQL 2005 is still in Extended Support too... ("Microsoft offers a minimum of 10 years of support for SQL Server products.") What are SQLServerCentral support dates? I got today's question correct, but only because I'd recently been studying for the 2008 exams...[/quote]We've had this debate before, and the concensus seemed to be that QotD refers to SQL Server versions currently under full support, not those under extended support, and that the version has to be specified if and only if there is a version currently in full support for which the answer is wrong.

RE: Noise

Rich Weissler — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 03:04:30 GMT

[quote][b]okbangas (10/16/2012)[/b][hr]If it were different in two supported editions of SQL Server, I agree. However, SQL Server 2005 is not supported anymore, so this question is correct for all supported editions of SQL Server.[/quote]I didn't realize SQLServerCentral had support dates too. [url=http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/en/us/support/support-updates.aspx]Microsoft has SQL 2000 on Extended Support for another six months or so[/url], and SQL 2005 is still in Extended Support too... ("Microsoft offers a minimum of 10 years of support for SQL Server products.") What are SQLServerCentral support dates? I got today's question correct, but only because I'd recently been studying for the 2008 exams...

RE: Noise

kapil_kk — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 02:52:41 GMT

thanks Hugo for the explanation....I am not much aware about this and only thing I knew that somewhat there is word like noise list in sql server 2005 that's why i select that option...

RE: Noise

Hugo Kornelis — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 02:48:53 GMT

[quote][b]okbangas (10/16/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]kapil190588 (10/15/2012)[/b][hr]As sql server version was not specified so I selected NoiseList but got wrong...I think version should be mentioned in question..learn new thing today.......[/quote]If it were different in two supported editions of SQL Server, I agree. However, SQL Server 2005 is not supported anymore, so this question is correct for all supported editions of SQL Server.[/quote]When I saw the question and the list of answers, I *knew* there would be debate over this.However, I agree with Okbangas - the question is fine without mentioning the version. And not just because SQL Server 2005 is out of date. I might have at least somewhat concurred with Kapil if that were the only argument. However, the "correct" answer for SQL Server 2005 and before was not included.In SQL Server 2005, the words to be ignored were called "noise words". But lists of those words were not ever called "noise lists" - they were called "noise word files". So even those who have only experience with SQL Server 2005 and prior should have been able to realize that a name change had happened, and that they needed to do more research.I think this was a great question, Steve! :-)

RE: Noise

paul s-306273 — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:37:14 GMT

I hadn't come across this before, so just glad to get the point.Thanks Steve.

RE: Noise

Stewart "Arturius" Campbell — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:21:39 GMT

Good question, thanks, Steve

RE: Noise

Keld Laursen (VFL) — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:27:10 GMT

[quote][b]kapil190588 (10/15/2012)[/b][hr]As sql server version was not specified so I selected NoiseList but got wrong...I think version should be mentioned in question..learn new thing today.......[/quote]Although getting it right, I concur with kapil190588 that the version should somehow be mentioned. I had to google a little to find the answer, and did have to work my way through a couple of SQL server versions to end up with the Stop List.But thanks for the question anyway.:-)

RE: Noise

okbangas — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 00:19:48 GMT

[quote][b]kapil190588 (10/15/2012)[/b][hr]As sql server version was not specified so I selected NoiseList but got wrong...I think version should be mentioned in question..learn new thing today.......[/quote]If it were different in two supported editions of SQL Server, I agree. However, SQL Server 2005 is not supported anymore, so this question is correct for all supported editions of SQL Server.

RE: Noise

kapil_kk — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 23:53:33 GMT

As sql server version was not specified so I selected NoiseList but got wrong...I think version should be mentioned in question..learn new thing today.......

RE: Noise

Lokesh Vij — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 23:20:57 GMT

Thanks Steve. I was not aware of this. Got to learn something new today :-)

RE: Noise

demonfox — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 22:56:14 GMT

Keeping the title as noise ; kool ...stoplists; I wasn't sure of the nomenclature but I got that correct after reading an article ...nice to learn something.thanks for the question

Noise

Steve Jones - SSC Editor — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 20:41:13 GMT

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