Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase «««56789»»

Logged Operations Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Tuesday, April 12, 2011 7:08 AM
Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, January 31, 2013 8:01 AM
Points: 1,228, Visits: 1,046
Lynn Pettis (4/7/2011)
For the record, I missed this one too.
I also found SanDroid and his arguments most interesting, if not totally off in left field somewhere. It is annoying when an individual refuses to support his position with demonstratable facts.


Strange, that was my position on the question.
What demonstrable fact would you like me to post that shows the lack of support for the correct answers listed in the reference material provided?

If you get asked crazy, about crazy, what do you respond with?

Maybe you did not understand why certain posts where even made.
Many were just responses to people that were not even trying to understand what the original objections about the QOTD was.

Someone misread something I posted, could be due to a typo made, and then I prove this in code. What they asked for had nothing to do with what I wanted to know about.
Post #1092048
Posted Tuesday, April 12, 2011 7:35 AM
Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, January 31, 2013 8:01 AM
Points: 1,228, Visits: 1,046
WayneS (4/7/2011)

IMHO, he didn't get the answer he wanted; he interpreted it the way he wanted to in order to make himself feel better.


Wayne, you are right. I really wanted you to answer why you re-wrote the quote that came from your reference material as a correct answer.

I did settle for the author of your reference material also stating that the way you worded the answer was not well.

I also just focused on that and never asked any other questions (or got answers) that I had about your QOTD.
All of the errors, I thought, were cause by flaws in the QOTD submission process more than anything else. Until you told me that several people reviewed your question before submission.
Post #1092084
Posted Tuesday, April 12, 2011 8:11 AM


SSC-Insane

SSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-Insane

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 7:22 PM
Points: 20,680, Visits: 32,279
SanDroid (4/12/2011)
Lynn Pettis (4/7/2011)
For the record, I missed this one too.
I also found SanDroid and his arguments most interesting, if not totally off in left field somewhere. It is annoying when an individual refuses to support his position with demonstratable facts.


Strange, that was my position on the question.
What demonstrable fact would you like me to post that shows the lack of support for the correct answers listed in the reference material provided?

If you get asked crazy, about crazy, what do you respond with?

Maybe you did not understand why certain posts where even made.
Many were just responses to people that were not even trying to understand what the original objections about the QOTD was.

Someone misread something I posted, could be due to a typo made, and then I prove this in code. What they asked for had nothing to do with what I wanted to know about.


Bottom line, your stating your interpretation of the support information isn't enough. Support your position with code, hard data from the DMV's, output from t-logs (yes, there is a way to read the logs). Post the code and your results. Posting the code allows others to verify your results, to experiment with other alternatives.

To paraphrase an old saying, "Code talks, BS walks."



Lynn Pettis

For better assistance in answering your questions, click here
For tips to get better help with Performance Problems, click here
For Running Totals and its variations, click here or when working with partitioned tables
For more about Tally Tables, click here
For more about Cross Tabs and Pivots, click here and here
Managing Transaction Logs

SQL Musings from the Desert Fountain Valley SQL (My Mirror Blog)
Post #1092113
Posted Tuesday, April 12, 2011 8:35 AM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 3:49 PM
Points: 39,886, Visits: 36,233
SanDroid (4/12/2011)
GilaMonster (4/12/2011)
Piquet (4/12/2011)
Umm - there are TWO correct answers listed for this question (as described in the explanation), but only ONE can be selected. i.e.:
- Inserts into Table Variables are not logged
- Version Store is not logged

...and you only get points for the second of these answers...


Inserts into table variables are logged. The explanation reads:

1. Insert (and update/delete) statements into table variables are logged - see "Changes to Table Variables are not logged" at http://sqlinthewild.co.za/index.php/2010/10/12/a-trio-of-table-variables


The blog post addresses three myths around table variables, including the myth that the changes aren't logged, sand proves them wrong.


Gila, As I see you and others have noticed, there are several things wrong with the question and answer. You should contact WayneS directly. The day of the question, it seems, he thought I was the only one that noticed.


I noticed nothing wrong with the question or answer, nor have I implied as much anywhere in this thread. In fact you are the only person complaining. Piquet simply misread the explanation.

And, for the record, I spoke with Wayne extensively on this before it was posted.



Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008, MVP
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability

We walk in the dark places no others will enter
We stand on the bridge and no one may pass

Post #1092127
Posted Tuesday, April 12, 2011 8:51 AM
Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, January 31, 2013 8:01 AM
Points: 1,228, Visits: 1,046
GilaMonster (4/12/2011)
I noticed nothing wrong with the question or answer, nor have I implied as much anywhere in this thread. In fact you are the only person complaining. Piquet simply misread the explanation.

And, for the record, I spoke with Wayne extensively on this before it was posted.


Wow... I totally mis-read what you where saying. For some reason when I read it the first time I thought you were agreeing with his statement.
I apologize for not reading that more carefully before posting about it.

Post #1092147
Posted Tuesday, April 12, 2011 9:36 AM
Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, January 31, 2013 8:01 AM
Points: 1,228, Visits: 1,046
Lynn Pettis (4/12/2011)

Bottom line, your stating your interpretation of the support information isn't enough. Support your position with code, hard data from the DMV's, output from t-logs (yes, there is a way to read the logs). Post the code and your results. Posting the code allows others to verify your results, to experiment with other alternatives.

To paraphrase an old saying, "Code talks, BS walks."

You are correct. I should have provided something that proved what I was stating was correct.
I have no hard data from a DMV, but I think this is clear enough.
 Declare @quote1 varchar(max)
,@quote2 varchar(max)
,@quote3 varchar(max)

SET @quote1 = 'Data affecting the version store' -- QOTD Answer;
SET @quote2 = '"Inserts" into the version store' -- QOTD Answer explination;
SET @quote3 = '“insert” into the Append-Only store' -- QOTD Answer refernece;

SELECT 'X' where @quote1 = @quote2
union
SELECT 'X' where @quote2 = @quote3
union
SELECT 'X' where @quote1 = @quote3;

I know that the above code will never return any value or result other than "(no column name)".
Other people told me it does, and others are telling me that this code does not execute.
I asked for this to be explained. It was not the first thing I asked, but it is where it ended up.
Post #1092182
Posted Tuesday, April 12, 2011 9:57 AM
Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:45 AM
Points: 1,030, Visits: 6,685
WayneS (4/7/2011)
mohammed moinudheen (4/7/2011)
It is very tough to get this question right:)



Actually, I meant it to be tough. The other choices are all myths that a lot of people believe, and I wanted to debunk those at the same time.


You did just that, mate. I chose TRUNCATE.



Low-hanging fruit picker and defender of the moggies





For better assistance in answering your questions, please read this.




Understanding and using APPLY, (I) and (II) Paul White

Hidden RBAR: Triangular Joins / The "Numbers" or "Tally" Table: What it is and how it replaces a loop Jeff Moden
Post #1092199
Posted Tuesday, April 12, 2011 10:06 AM


SSC-Insane

SSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-Insane

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 7:22 PM
Points: 20,680, Visits: 32,279
SanDroid (4/12/2011)
Lynn Pettis (4/12/2011)

Bottom line, your stating your interpretation of the support information isn't enough. Support your position with code, hard data from the DMV's, output from t-logs (yes, there is a way to read the logs). Post the code and your results. Posting the code allows others to verify your results, to experiment with other alternatives.

To paraphrase an old saying, "Code talks, BS walks."

You are correct. I should have provided something that proved what I was stating was correct.
I have no hard data from a DMV, but I think this is clear enough.
 Declare @quote1 varchar(max)
,@quote2 varchar(max)
,@quote3 varchar(max)

SET @quote1 = 'Data affecting the version store' -- QOTD Answer;
SET @quote2 = '"Inserts" into the version store' -- QOTD Answer explination;
SET @quote3 = '“insert” into the Append-Only store' -- QOTD Answer refernece;

SELECT 'X' where @quote1 = @quote2
union
SELECT 'X' where @quote2 = @quote3
union
SELECT 'X' where @quote1 = @quote3;

I know that the above code will never return any value or result other than "(no column name)".
Other people told me it does, and others are telling me that this code does not execute.
I asked for this to be explained. It was not the first thing I asked, but it is where it ended up.



Please explain how your code supports your position. All I see is a union of 3 selects of a literal value based the comparison of two variables.



Lynn Pettis

For better assistance in answering your questions, click here
For tips to get better help with Performance Problems, click here
For Running Totals and its variations, click here or when working with partitioned tables
For more about Tally Tables, click here
For more about Cross Tabs and Pivots, click here and here
Managing Transaction Logs

SQL Musings from the Desert Fountain Valley SQL (My Mirror Blog)
Post #1092208
Posted Tuesday, April 12, 2011 10:17 AM
Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, January 31, 2013 8:01 AM
Points: 1,228, Visits: 1,046
Lynn Pettis (4/12/2011)
SanDroid (4/12/2011)
Lynn Pettis (4/12/2011)

Bottom line, your stating your interpretation of the support information isn't enough. Support your position with code, hard data from the DMV's, output from t-logs (yes, there is a way to read the logs). Post the code and your results. Posting the code allows others to verify your results, to experiment with other alternatives.

To paraphrase an old saying, "Code talks, BS walks."

You are correct. I should have provided something that proved what I was stating was correct.
I have no hard data from a DMV, but I think this is clear enough.
 Declare @quote1 varchar(max)
,@quote2 varchar(max)
,@quote3 varchar(max)

SET @quote1 = 'Data affecting the version store' -- QOTD Answer;
SET @quote2 = '"Inserts" into the version store' -- QOTD Answer explination;
SET @quote3 = '“insert” into the Append-Only store' -- QOTD Answer refernece;

SELECT 'X' where @quote1 = @quote2
union
SELECT 'X' where @quote2 = @quote3
union
SELECT 'X' where @quote1 = @quote3;

I know that the above code will never return any value or result other than "(no column name)".
Other people told me it does, and others are telling me that this code does not execute.
I asked for this to be explained. It was not the first thing I asked, but it is where it ended up.



Please explain how your code supports your position. All I see is a union of 3 selects of a literal value based the comparison of two variables.

My position is that the three variables will never be equal to each other, but the QOTD answer is only correct if they do.
I await any explination as to why these three variables where submitted as being equal.
If you have some code you can post that that show these three values taken from the QOTD material are equal and have the same meaning, please post it. I did have an example that used soundex but I have seen that function give a false positive in the past.
If you feel like posting more questions about what I am stating, please provide a code example.
Remember, it is up to you to provide code to back up what you are trying to say.
Post #1092214
Posted Tuesday, April 12, 2011 10:52 AM


SSC-Insane

SSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-Insane

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 7:22 PM
Points: 20,680, Visits: 32,279
SanDroid (4/12/2011)
Lynn Pettis (4/12/2011)
SanDroid (4/12/2011)
Lynn Pettis (4/12/2011)

Bottom line, your stating your interpretation of the support information isn't enough. Support your position with code, hard data from the DMV's, output from t-logs (yes, there is a way to read the logs). Post the code and your results. Posting the code allows others to verify your results, to experiment with other alternatives.

To paraphrase an old saying, "Code talks, BS walks."

You are correct. I should have provided something that proved what I was stating was correct.
I have no hard data from a DMV, but I think this is clear enough.
 Declare @quote1 varchar(max)
,@quote2 varchar(max)
,@quote3 varchar(max)

SET @quote1 = 'Data affecting the version store' -- QOTD Answer;
SET @quote2 = '"Inserts" into the version store' -- QOTD Answer explination;
SET @quote3 = '“insert” into the Append-Only store' -- QOTD Answer refernece;

SELECT 'X' where @quote1 = @quote2
union
SELECT 'X' where @quote2 = @quote3
union
SELECT 'X' where @quote1 = @quote3;

I know that the above code will never return any value or result other than "(no column name)".
Other people told me it does, and others are telling me that this code does not execute.
I asked for this to be explained. It was not the first thing I asked, but it is where it ended up.



Please explain how your code supports your position. All I see is a union of 3 selects of a literal value based the comparison of two variables.

My position is that the three variables will never be equal to each other, but the QOTD answer is only correct if they do.
I await any explination as to why these three variables where submitted as being equal.
If you have some code you can post that that show these three values taken from the QOTD material are equal and have the same meaning, please post it. I did have an example that used soundex but I have seen that function give a false positive in the past.
If you feel like posting more questions about what I am stating, please provide a code example.
Remember, it is up to you to provide code to back up what you are trying to say.


You still haven't proven your point. I still see nothing in the code above that supports your position regarding the version store. I have also gone back through the QotD and all the posts and see nothing regarding this code.

Please explain how this supports your position regarding the version store. You assert that this code supports your position, now prove it.



Lynn Pettis

For better assistance in answering your questions, click here
For tips to get better help with Performance Problems, click here
For Running Totals and its variations, click here or when working with partitioned tables
For more about Tally Tables, click here
For more about Cross Tabs and Pivots, click here and here
Managing Transaction Logs

SQL Musings from the Desert Fountain Valley SQL (My Mirror Blog)
Post #1092250
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase «««56789»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse