Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 


 
     
Recent Posts
   
Popular Topics
Home   
Search
    Members    Calendar    Who's On

Home » Article Discussions » Article Discussions by Author » Discuss content posted by Tony Davis » Replace existing Database? JFDI!
Add to briefcase

Replace existing Database? JFDI! Expand / Collapse
Rate Topic
Display Mode
Topic Options
Author
Message
Tony Davis
Posted Saturday, March 31, 2012 12:15 PM
Mr or Mrs. 500

Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500

Group: Administrators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 9:24 AM
Points: 511, Visits: 948
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Replace existing Database? JFDI!
Post #1276203
Alex Fekken
Posted Sunday, April 01, 2012 3:09 AM
SSC-Enthusiastic

SSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-Enthusiastic

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 4:00 AM
Points: 197, Visits: 455
I am usually quite happy to criticise what I think are bad aspects of SQL Server (or other products), but in this case I am more inclined to say:

Which part of REPLACE don't you get then?
Post #1276304
Tony Davis
Posted Sunday, April 01, 2012 4:51 AM
Mr or Mrs. 500

Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500

Group: Administrators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 9:24 AM
Points: 511, Visits: 948
As I tried to express in the editorial, I guess I initially, and wrongly, had a tendency to see REPLACE as "general purpose" command, whenever restoring over an existing database, and so included it in code where it wasn't necessary. It struck me as a case where a better name might encourage a more cautious approach to its use, though I hardly intended the piece as a strident criticism of SQL Server.

If it turns out I'm the only one who was initially unaware of the "safety checks" that use of REPLACE disables then we can all move on .
Post #1276309
patrickmcginnis59
Posted Sunday, April 01, 2012 12:56 PM
SSC-Addicted

SSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-Addicted

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 4:23 PM
Points: 415, Visits: 2,333
user interface is hard! I like the idea of a "force" like keyword being required when bypassing all the safety checks, but its probably best to research combinations of keywords especially with T-SQL. I know this website wouldn't be the first to contain remarks about unexpected behavior with SQL server.
Post #1276405
Alex Fekken
Posted Sunday, April 01, 2012 7:30 PM
SSC-Enthusiastic

SSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-Enthusiastic

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 4:00 AM
Points: 197, Visits: 455
@Tony

It's probably a matter of taste but I do not see the difference between REPLACE and FORCE_OVERWRITE, except more characters to type; perhaps because English isn't my native language.

And shouldn't you then have the same, or even more, concerns about (for example) UPDATE-without-WHERE? This is much likely to happen because it is not just DBAs that are likely to have permissions to execute one of those... So perhaps we would need

UPDATE ...
SET ...
WITH FORCE_UPDATE_EVEN_WITHOUT_WHERE

?
Post #1276430
David Benoit
Posted Monday, April 02, 2012 9:33 AM


SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 6:41 AM
Points: 2,064, Visits: 3,449
Tony Davis (4/1/2012)

If it turns out I'm the only one who was initially unaware of the "safety checks" that use of REPLACE disables then we can all move on .


Uh, errr, ummm, well, I always assumed the same Tony. So, I'm sheepishly laughing here but thankful for the additional information. I'll certainly be doing a bit more reading.



David

@SQLTentmaker
SQL Tentmaker
“He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” - Jim Elliot
Post #1276707
TravisDBA
Posted Monday, April 02, 2012 10:40 AM


Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 10:46 AM
Points: 1,290, Visits: 3,001
If it turns out I'm the only one who was initially unaware of the "safety checks" that use of REPLACE disables then we can all move on .


Time to move on.

"Technology is a weird thing. It brings you great gifts with one hand, and it stabs you in the back with the other. ..."
Post #1276753
Tony Davis
Posted Monday, April 02, 2012 10:48 AM
Mr or Mrs. 500

Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500

Group: Administrators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 9:24 AM
Points: 511, Visits: 948
Thanks everyone, for the feedback.

Personally, I'd be very surprised if everyone was aware of it, plus the concept of a "force flag" that indicates when certain checks are being bypassed is hardly a new one.

Anyway, onwards and upwards!
Post #1276761
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase

Permissions Expand / Collapse

 
 
Copyright © 2002-2013 Simple Talk Publishing. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use. Report Abuse.