SQL Clone
SQLServerCentral is supported by Redgate
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 


Logged Operations


Logged Operations

Author
Message
SanDroid
SanDroid
SSCommitted
SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 1574 Visits: 1046
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.
SanDroid
SanDroid
SSCommitted
SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 1574 Visits: 1046
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.
Lynn Pettis
Lynn Pettis
SSC-Dedicated
SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 39083 Visits: 38518
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."

Cool
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)
GilaMonster
GilaMonster
SSC Guru
SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)SSC Guru (86K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 86741 Visits: 45254
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, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
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


SanDroid
SanDroid
SSCommitted
SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 1574 Visits: 1046
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.
SanDroid
SanDroid
SSCommitted
SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 1574 Visits: 1046
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.
ChrisM@home
ChrisM@home
SSCrazy
SSCrazy (2K reputation)SSCrazy (2K reputation)SSCrazy (2K reputation)SSCrazy (2K reputation)SSCrazy (2K reputation)SSCrazy (2K reputation)SSCrazy (2K reputation)SSCrazy (2K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 2032 Visits: 10354
WayneS (4/7/2011)
mohammed moinudheen (4/7/2011)
It is very tough to get this question rightSmile



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
Lynn Pettis
Lynn Pettis
SSC-Dedicated
SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 39083 Visits: 38518
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.

Cool
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)
SanDroid
SanDroid
SSCommitted
SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)SSCommitted (1.6K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 1574 Visits: 1046
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.
Lynn Pettis
Lynn Pettis
SSC-Dedicated
SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)SSC-Dedicated (39K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 39083 Visits: 38518
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.

Cool
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)
Go


Permissions

You can't post new topics.
You can't post topic replies.
You can't post new polls.
You can't post replies to polls.
You can't edit your own topics.
You can't delete your own topics.
You can't edit other topics.
You can't delete other topics.
You can't edit your own posts.
You can't edit other posts.
You can't delete your own posts.
You can't delete other posts.
You can't post events.
You can't edit your own events.
You can't edit other events.
You can't delete your own events.
You can't delete other events.
You can't send private messages.
You can't send emails.
You can read topics.
You can't vote in polls.
You can't upload attachments.
You can download attachments.
You can't post HTML code.
You can't edit HTML code.
You can't post IFCode.
You can't post JavaScript.
You can post emoticons.
You can't post or upload images.

Select a forum

































































































































































SQLServerCentral


Search