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 ««12

Replacing BCP with SQLBulkLoad Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Monday, July 21, 2003 2:19 PM


Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Sunday, October 19, 2014 4:48 AM
Points: 1,327, Visits: 156
quote:

My fault on the English - we haven't decided what to do just yet. Clearly if can't follow the article it's of no value, yet we don't have time to rewrite content that comes in from readers who use English as a second language.

Andy




No apologies needed. As an American that wishes to live in a WORLD community, I recognize that many of the people we have to work with will be using English as Second Language (ESL). Those of us in America need to be considerate and tolerant of those that make a great deal of effort to learn and understand our language.

A very interesting article in BusinessWeek a few months ago presented a story how an airline passenger from Taiwan (I think) could not make the stewardess understand her question in the best English she could muster. But a Japanese and Indonesian assisted, all using ESL, no one using their native languages, to make the stewardess understand the woman was asking where the restroom was. The point of the article is that most of the world uses ESL successfully in business and technology. But Americans have the most difficult time in both understanding and speaking with ESL people, because of our use of double-meaning words (e.g. right) or slang or idioms that have no sense in the rest of the world.

Bottom line, it is pure elitism to scoff at the open exchange of ideas because the elitist cannot take the time to read carefully and to understand what is said. Those elitists do not need apologies, but need scolding. This is a public forum, not a grammar contest.





Mark
Post #68657
Posted Monday, July 21, 2003 2:43 PM


Keeper of the Duck

Keeper of the Duck

Group: Moderators
Last Login: Friday, November 14, 2014 7:14 AM
Points: 6,625, Visits: 1,876
I have to agree with Mark on this one. I've watched people intentionally not listen to my mother because she was Japanese. It didn't matter that she was speaking perfectly clear English with only a hint of an accent. Because they said to themselves, "I won't understand her so I'm not going to even listen," they ended up not understanding her because they didn't listen.

My respect for the author writing an article in the first place. Those of us who do it on a regular basis know how hard it can be. It's that much harder when it's not in your native language.


K. Brian Kelley
http://www.truthsolutions.com/
Author: Start to Finish Guide to SQL Server Performance Monitoring
http://www.netimpress.com/shop/product.asp?ProductID=NI-SQL1


Edited by - bkelley on 07/21/2003 2:43:54 PM


K. Brian Kelley, CISA, MCSE, Security+, MVP - SQL Server
Regular Columnist (Security), SQLServerCentral.com
Author of Introduction to SQL Server: Basic Skills for Any SQL Server User
| Professional Development blog | Technical Blog | LinkedIn | Twitter
Post #68658
Posted Monday, July 21, 2003 2:58 PM
SSCertifiable

SSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiable

Group: Moderators
Last Login: Thursday, December 18, 2014 6:56 AM
Points: 6,804, Visits: 1,934
Well said. That reflects a lot of what we were thinking. The counterpoint (that we were thinking) is that technical material is hard enough to read/learn when written very clearly - obscure it and it becomes even harder.

Andy
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/awarren/




Andy
SQLAndy - My Blog!
Connect with me on LinkedIn
Follow me on Twitter
Post #68659
Posted Tuesday, July 22, 2003 1:12 AM


SSCertifiable

SSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiable

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, December 9, 2014 5:36 AM
Points: 5,956, Visits: 286
Hi Brian,
quote:

My respect for the author writing an article in the first place. Those of us who do it on a regular basis know how hard it can be. It's that much harder when it's not in your native language.


very well said!!!

In fact, that's what refrains me from submitting some article yet.

In addition, I'm at war with english punctuation. (to be honest, I'm with german to a certain degree, too )

Let' s look at this as a first try, which is always the hardest one.
And maybe as a suggestion to the SiteOwners, to review articles from non native english speakers before publishing. That means no proofreading or editing, just 'normal' reading.

Cheers,
Frank


--
Frank Kalis
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Webmaster: http://www.insidesql.org/blogs
My blog: http://www.insidesql.org/blogs/frankkalis/
Post #68660
Posted Tuesday, July 22, 2003 1:29 AM


SSCertifiable

SSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiable

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, December 9, 2014 5:36 AM
Points: 5,956, Visits: 286
Hi David,
quote:

This article assumes that XML is the way of the future, which is a false assumption.

XML has some significant problems.
1. Performance. I'm not talking about file size (and the resulting poor performance over networks), but about that fact that parsing XML is an intensive process. For one thing, you must read the entire data structure into memory because you must read to the closing tag. CSV has no such problems.


funny anecdote on this happened yesterday.

I was in a project meeting with our IT staff. Basically to discuss how to get mutual fund quotes into our mainframe.

When it comes to the 'which format' question, I said with your post in mind, hey, let's do it with XML. It's universal, trendy blabla..

Before going on, I must say, I really like our mainframe guys. They are innovative, flexible, open for new thoughts.

Guess what they said!

No, no XML, only CSV, that just fine. We can reuse existing code.. and anyway who cares about XML.

Well!



Cheers,
Frank


--
Frank Kalis
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Webmaster: http://www.insidesql.org/blogs
My blog: http://www.insidesql.org/blogs/frankkalis/
Post #68661
Posted Wednesday, August 27, 2008 10:45 AM
SSC-Enthusiastic

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

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Sunday, December 14, 2014 6:31 AM
Points: 123, Visits: 526
Hi All
i am trying to implement the article on more complex XML structres, and maybe my work is for nothing beacue a deeper of more then one level of xml is not supported?
for xml how to i build a Schema for :

ROOT>
HEAD>
TIME>11.59.26
LIST>
TO>d@e.com
/LIST>

/HEAD>
BODY>
MSG>hi
DATA>dfdfdf


</ROOT


( i have removed some of the open/close tags beacuse then you can't see the xml!!!)
thanks in advnace
Peleg
Post #559804
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase ««12

Permissions Expand / Collapse