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 Anders Hellner » Go go go?
Add to briefcase
18 posts, Page 2 of 2
««12

Go go go? Expand / Collapse
Rate Topic
Display Mode
Topic Options
Author
Message
john.arnott
Posted Monday, August 25, 2008 10:27 AM


UDP Broadcaster

UDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP Broadcaster

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 10:57 PM
Points: 1,491, Visits: 3,008
I thank David Dresser for a good job parsing this out. I tried making it slightly more coder-friendly by renaming the proc "JO" and the variable "KO". I then found that all but the first delimiter "Go" statements didn't seem to be needed at all. 
CREATE PROC JO @KO int=NULL AS SELECT @KO
GO
JO;
GO 3
--GO
EXECUTE('JO 3')
GO 3
--GO
DROP PROC JO
--GO
Post #558267
john.arnott
Posted Monday, August 25, 2008 10:41 AM


UDP Broadcaster

UDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP Broadcaster

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 10:57 PM
Points: 1,491, Visits: 3,008
Posts from Anders and webrunner point to how this script uses a new feature in SSMS not available in SQL 2000 QM. The 
Go 3

syntax to run something multiple times is not available in QM.

This raises a red flag about testing. The script works fine in SSMS against a SQL 2000 database. This implies that even in a SQL2005 db, it may not work from a program or in a stored procedure.

I've already burned a half-hour on this and have too much to do today, so will leave the resolution of that question to others.
Post #558279
RBarryYoung
Posted Monday, August 25, 2008 10:55 AM


SSCrazy Eights

SSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy EightsSSCrazy Eights

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Saturday, May 04, 2013 11:13 AM
Points: 9,855, Visits: 9,374
john.arnott (8/25/2008)
This raises a red flag about testing. The script works fine in SSMS against a SQL 2000 database. This implies that even in a SQL2005 db, it may not work from a program or in a stored procedure.


No it certainly will not. "GO" has always been a client interface feature. It does not work from a program or from a stored procedure and never has. Nor did the question imply that it would, it did specifically say "from SSMS".

-- RBarryYoung, (302)375-0451 blog: MovingSQL.com, Twitter: @RBarryYoung
Proactive Performance Solutions, Inc. "Performance is our middle name."
Post #558295
Yelena Varshal
Posted Monday, August 25, 2008 1:09 PM
Hall of Fame

Hall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of FameHall of Fame

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, July 30, 2012 10:42 AM
Points: 3,434, Visits: 519
GO should never be used as identifier.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189822.aspx
Reserved Keywords (Transact-SQL)

This is not T-SQL keyword now but is on the list on ODBC keywords (second list in the referenced article) and on the third list of the future T-SQL keywords. This article says: "Although it is syntactically possible to use SQL Server reserved keywords as identifiers and object names in Transact-SQL scripts, you can do this only by using delimited identifiers." About Future Keywords the article says: "The following keywords could be reserved in future releases of SQL Server as new features are implemented. Consider avoiding the use of these words as identifiers."

Regards,
Yelena Varshal
Post #558387
Anipaul
Posted Tuesday, August 26, 2008 6:35 AM
SSCarpal Tunnel

SSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal TunnelSSCarpal Tunnel

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 1:35 AM
Points: 4,787, Visits: 1,336
Wonderful question...


Post #558809
L' Eomot Inversé
Posted Monday, January 26, 2009 1:03 PM


SSCertifiable

SSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiable

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 10:01 AM
Points: 7,089, Visits: 7,145
It threw me. I assumed SSMS would behave the same way as isqlw so gave the wrong answer. I'm inclined to consider the SMSS behaviour a bug, as making sense out of using "go" as an identifier is just making it easier to write obscure bugs - but in fact SQLS 2000 isqlw is just as bad as small adjustments to the script can demonstrate.

Tom
Que conclure à la fin de tous mes longs propos? C'est que les préjugés sont la raison des sots. (Voltaire, 1756)
Post #643666
jts_2003
Posted Thursday, June 25, 2009 6:54 AM
Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 2:26 AM
Points: 1,060, Visits: 4,172
That's what I like about QotD - the simplest questions are often the most thought provoking!

This definitely proves you should be careful what identifier names you choose.
Post #741767
kapil_kk
Posted Tuesday, December 11, 2012 3:19 AM


Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Sunday, May 19, 2013 11:16 PM
Points: 1,061, Visits: 1,151
gr888 question,,
GO GO GO
Post #1394992
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase
18 posts, Page 2 of 2
««12

Permissions Expand / Collapse

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