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 ««1234»»»

The Full Potential of SQL 2000 Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Tuesday, December 2, 2008 6:24 AM
Old Hand

Old HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld Hand

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 11:33 AM
Points: 312, Visits: 1,099
Either way, it's still a very good product. I've used Sybase and now forced to learn Oracle, when you see/use them you will appropriate the SQL server even more. Just hope that Microsoft will continue to listen to the SQL communities and find a way to still make money and keep us all happy.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Rudy



Post #612004
Posted Tuesday, December 2, 2008 5:57 PM


SSC-Dedicated

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

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 7:56 PM
Points: 36,775, Visits: 31,230
I know lot's of good folks that like it, but I don't care for Oracle much, either. Many will disagree with me, but I find it too limiting.

--Jeff Moden
"RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for "Row-By-Agonizing-Row".

First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column."

(play on words) "Just because you CAN do something in T-SQL, doesn't mean you SHOULDN'T." --22 Aug 2013

Helpful Links:
How to post code problems
How to post performance problems
Post #612495
Posted Sunday, December 14, 2008 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: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, July 25, 2014 3:19 AM
Points: 577, Visits: 2,503
I'm not sure if I buy the idea that it is becoming simpler and simpler to write applications because the tools we use are getting better and better. It is this belief that keeps driving us on to upgrade to the latest bleeding edge of Microsoft product whatever the inconvenience and cost. It may be a good idea, but we need to make a conscious decision.

Over the past twenty years, the lead-time for new applications has been getting longer and longer, they are getting more and more expensive, and the failure rate has remained constant. There have been some huge breakthroughs, certainly, and the expectations, and demands for quality and compliance have increased enormously, but basically, the increase in the complexity of the software tools we use has not been mirrored in more rapid or successful application development. There has always been a huge gap between marketing and reality in the IT industry.



Best wishes,

Phil Factor
Simple Talk
Post #619249
Posted Sunday, December 14, 2008 9:53 AM


SSC-Dedicated

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

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 7:56 PM
Points: 36,775, Visits: 31,230
Phil Factor (12/14/2008)
I'm not sure if I buy the idea that it is becoming simpler and simpler to write applications because the tools we use are getting better and better. It is this belief that keeps driving us on to upgrade to the latest bleeding edge of Microsoft product whatever the inconvenience and cost. It may be a good idea, but we need to make a conscious decision.

Over the past twenty years, the lead-time for new applications has been getting longer and longer, they are getting more and more expensive, and the failure rate has remained constant. There have been some huge breakthroughs, certainly, and the expectations, and demands for quality and compliance have increased enormously, but basically, the increase in the complexity of the software tools we use has not been mirrored in more rapid or successful application development. There has always been a huge gap between marketing and reality in the IT industry.


Very well said. That just about sums up the reasons why I don't care for DTS, SSIS, CLR's, Business Objects, and a host of other flashy computational aberrations that supposedly enable people to be more productive. People have to become familiar in many areas to do what... Import a simple file? Do a simple split? Create a running total? Join a couple of tables? How many times have you seen a DTS or SSIS job where something (supposedly) can't be done and people revert to an writing an ActiveX component or a PERL script or CLR... etc, etc. I'm seeing that in my current job, alot! And, everything they're writing that way is either slow or horribly and unnecessarily complex. For example, they have a very complex file type to import that defies all conventional methods of import. They wrote a DTS job that uses Perl scripts, ActiveX and a couple of other computational flavors. It takes 40 minutes on a file of just 30,000 rows and 215 columns wide just to get the file ready for import never mind doing the actual import. Using 100% T-SQL in a comparitively short sproc, I get the same thing done PLUS the actual import in 92 seconds.

Microsoft keeps adding/releasing products to "make it easier" to use SQL Server. As a result, people who know nothing of databases are now using and abusing it. It's made SQL Server much more popular, but it sure plays hell on systems when these people touch the data.

Some folks say I'm being stubborn about not using tools other than T-SQL. I guess that's pretty much true... when I can take a complex file import from 40+ minutes down to 90 seconds or write T-SQL to change a 24 hour, 62 database dupe-check that would usually fail, to a very lean T-SQL sproc that does 93 databases in 15 minutes and hasn't failed yet, I'm thinking that lots of folks just haven't taken the time to really explore the full potential of SQL Server and, especially, T-SQL. Further, it only took me three days to do it including final acceptance testing. The original dupe check, written in C#, took 2 developers 2 weeks to make something slow, unreliable, and not leave enough time in a day to actually do the full 93 database requirement.

As you can tell, I not only agree that all these flashy products HAVEN'T increased productivity, effeciency, accuracy, or performance of applications, I believe that they've generally caused a decrease in all of that and an increase in the cost of getting products to market even if the market is "in house usage". There are exceptions, of course, like Reporting Services, but for the most part, I think most folks have fallen for the Microsoft marketing strategy and the "you're stupid if you don't do this" mentality... I think the flash of all that other stuff get's in their eyes when it comes to making common sense and innovative applications.


--Jeff Moden
"RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for "Row-By-Agonizing-Row".

First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column."

(play on words) "Just because you CAN do something in T-SQL, doesn't mean you SHOULDN'T." --22 Aug 2013

Helpful Links:
How to post code problems
How to post performance problems
Post #619292
Posted Sunday, December 14, 2008 4:52 PM


SSC-Dedicated

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

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 11:24 AM
Points: 33,088, Visits: 15,197
Are we sure it takes longer for new applications? I know we're in a mode of enhancing applications in small ways on a regular basis, but it seems that we do often develop new applications in months or even weeks instead of years.

Is quality down? Not sure about that, it's not great now, but it wasn't great before. At least not 10-15 years ago.

I do agree that more and more we have people that are less and less qualified touching applications and making life hard for us.

We upgrade too much, and I think that's a problem. Instead of charging for support and having longer lifecycles, we have shorter lifecycles, and often free or discounted support (and we get what we pay for). I think I'd like to have us go back to 4-5 year time frames for new versions and have support for 8-12 years for each one.







Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #619352
Posted Sunday, December 14, 2008 8:41 PM


SSC-Dedicated

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

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 7:56 PM
Points: 36,775, Visits: 31,230
BWHAAA-HAAAA! What life cycle? People can't even spell it anymore.

--Jeff Moden
"RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for "Row-By-Agonizing-Row".

First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column."

(play on words) "Just because you CAN do something in T-SQL, doesn't mean you SHOULDN'T." --22 Aug 2013

Helpful Links:
How to post code problems
How to post performance problems
Post #619370
Posted Monday, December 15, 2008 1:56 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: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, July 25, 2014 3:19 AM
Points: 577, Visits: 2,503
Certainly in the UK, we are beset by a number of failures of high-profile government IT initiatives. I feel sure that the average run-of-the-mill IT application within any organization is taking longer to complete. Even fifteen years ago, had I come up with an IT application to support a business that was going to take a year to implement, I'd have been laughed at.

This is always going to be subjective, but there certainly seems to be a perception that applications just don't seem to be developed any faster for all the 'Rapid Application Development' going on. Jonathan Sachs developed the whole of Lotus 123 V1 in assembler code in just six months in 1982, and the whole project took only a year.



Best wishes,

Phil Factor
Simple Talk
Post #619430
Posted Monday, December 15, 2008 5:37 AM


Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, February 18, 2014 7:14 AM
Points: 1,344, Visits: 1,983
Phil Factor (12/15/2008)
This is always going to be subjective, but there certainly seems to be a perception that applications just don't seem to be developed any faster for all the 'Rapid Application Development' going on. Jonathan Sachs developed the whole of Lotus 123 V1 in assembler code in just six months in 1982, and the whole project took only a year.
I've often felt that application development was faster when the tools were simpler.

In addition, there was much tighter control over the result. For example, a "hello world" can still be written using the DOS debug command...
C:\> debug
-n helloworld.com
-a 100
1552:0100 mov dx,010b
1552:0103 mov ah,9
1552:0105 int 21
1552:0107 mov ah,4c
1552:0109 int 21
1552:010B db 'Hello, World!',0d,0a,'$'
1552:011B
-r cx
CX 0000
:1b
-w
Writing 0001B bytes
-q

The result is all of 27 bytes long.

For a Visual Basic 2005 console application...
Module HelloWorld

Sub Main()
Console.WriteLine("Hello, World!")
End Sub

End Module

The compiled executable is 24.5 Mbyte!


Derek
Post #619499
Posted Monday, December 15, 2008 6:04 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: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, July 25, 2014 3:19 AM
Points: 577, Visits: 2,503
// You can still do it in under 2K
// Maybe we'll have to start a software movement for old
// codgers like me who like writing compact software in assembler code


.assembly extern mscorlib {} //Common Object Runtime Library
.assembly HelloWorld
{
.ver 1:0:0:1
} //we can add a lot more information in this block
.module HelloWorld.exe //the module name of our assembly
.method static void main() cil managed
{
.maxstack 1//max no. of items on the parameter stack
.entrypoint

ldstr "Hello world!"
call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine (string)
ret
}



Best wishes,

Phil Factor
Simple Talk
Post #619515
Posted Monday, December 15, 2008 6:25 AM


SSC-Dedicated

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

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 7:56 PM
Points: 36,775, Visits: 31,230
Heh...

ECHO "Hello World"



SELECT 'Hello World'




PRINT 'Hello World'


--Jeff Moden
"RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for "Row-By-Agonizing-Row".

First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column."

(play on words) "Just because you CAN do something in T-SQL, doesn't mean you SHOULDN'T." --22 Aug 2013

Helpful Links:
How to post code problems
How to post performance problems
Post #619533
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase ««1234»»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse