November 25, 2014 at 6:22 am
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/24/2014)
Jeff Moden (11/24/2014)
Evil Kraig F (11/24/2014)
Jeff Moden (11/24/2014)
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/24/2014)
Just a quick question to "the thread", am I missing something or is XML getting more popular? Just noticed that this topic on the XML forum has proportionally many times the viewings of any other current topic.😎
I'd like to look at it as it just being forced down more people's throats but I can't because people at work are enamored with it. I've seen them use it in place of things like a decent and fairly simple lookup table and then tell me that I was being too critical of "normalization" to the point of calling me a Luddite when I demonstrated how simple the correct alternative would be.
I still laugh at XML. Don't get me wrong, it's intensely useful in certain circumstances, but in general, it's "new and shiny!".... no, it's not. It's the old mainframe row order dependent structures with standardized formats for everyone. XML is just cleaning up what we'd been fighting with for 40+ years since the Eniac first coughed related results.
*shrugs* To answer your question, Eirikur, it's getting more popular. I believe people have finally started to give up on JSON (anecdotal, I have no evidence) and are coming back to XML as a tamer alternative to actually coding data structures Cobb style.
I no longer laugh at XML. I cry when see it in a database table. The only thing that makes me cry more is EDI. Actually, that's a lie... some of the folks here have converted some of the EDI we recieve and have changed it to XML and then store both in the database. :sick:
Many of the EDI standards have in fact moved to XML and of course when imported unconverted into a database, result in a Double Trouble (not the SRV kind though)
😎
Oh my - such fond memories. I got the honor of working on an EDI project once about 10 or so years ago. {insert head tick and nervous twitch here} It was a very arcane and difficult data set to work with. Once you get done with the structure (envelopes, documents, etc.) and get to the actual structure, some things *may* be included or not and *may* be included once or many times. :w00t:
It was dictated to me that I used a commercial EDI package for the string parsing, but it was so old that it only supported XMODEN, YMODEM, etc. as communication protocols. I used the $20K-string parser, but had to write all the communication and transfer stuff myself. The "programming" of the string parser was clicking dropdowns in an interface that was buggy to produce a series of text files containing instructions. Even simple business rules had to be coded in a separate environment and then run against the output files. It was good to get it done and it worked. However, when everyone is completely afraid to touch any part of it because they don't understand it, I would not call it a good solution. This is a case when the political gamesmanship of management defined an unmaintainable solution. I was the only one who understood it and I didn't like it.
November 25, 2014 at 6:33 am
Ed Wagner (11/25/2014)
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/24/2014)
Jeff Moden (11/24/2014)
Evil Kraig F (11/24/2014)
Jeff Moden (11/24/2014)
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/24/2014)
Just a quick question to "the thread", am I missing something or is XML getting more popular? Just noticed that this topic on the XML forum has proportionally many times the viewings of any other current topic.😎
I'd like to look at it as it just being forced down more people's throats but I can't because people at work are enamored with it. I've seen them use it in place of things like a decent and fairly simple lookup table and then tell me that I was being too critical of "normalization" to the point of calling me a Luddite when I demonstrated how simple the correct alternative would be.
I still laugh at XML. Don't get me wrong, it's intensely useful in certain circumstances, but in general, it's "new and shiny!".... no, it's not. It's the old mainframe row order dependent structures with standardized formats for everyone. XML is just cleaning up what we'd been fighting with for 40+ years since the Eniac first coughed related results.
*shrugs* To answer your question, Eirikur, it's getting more popular. I believe people have finally started to give up on JSON (anecdotal, I have no evidence) and are coming back to XML as a tamer alternative to actually coding data structures Cobb style.
I no longer laugh at XML. I cry when see it in a database table. The only thing that makes me cry more is EDI. Actually, that's a lie... some of the folks here have converted some of the EDI we recieve and have changed it to XML and then store both in the database. :sick:
Many of the EDI standards have in fact moved to XML and of course when imported unconverted into a database, result in a Double Trouble (not the SRV kind though)
😎
Oh my - such fond memories. I got the honor of working on an EDI project once about 10 or so years ago. {insert head tick and nervous twitch here} It was a very arcane and difficult data set to work with. Once you get done with the structure (envelopes, documents, etc.) and get to the actual structure, some things *may* be included or not and *may* be included once or many times. :w00t:
It was dictated to me that I used a commercial EDI package for the string parsing, but it was so old that it only supported XMODEN, YMODEM, etc. as communication protocols. I used the $20K-string parser, but had to write all the communication and transfer stuff myself. The "programming" of the string parser was clicking dropdowns in an interface that was buggy to produce a series of text files containing instructions. Even simple business rules had to be coded in a separate environment and then run against the output files. It was good to get it done and it worked. However, when everyone is completely afraid to touch any part of it because they don't understand it, I would not call it a good solution. This is a case when the political gamesmanship of management defined an unmaintainable solution. I was the only one who understood it and I didn't like it.
The memories of EDI work in the past are similar to the ones of the visits to the dentist, lot of pain, lot of money and forgotten as quickly as possible.
😎
November 25, 2014 at 6:38 am
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/25/2014)
Ed Wagner (11/25/2014)
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/24/2014)
Jeff Moden (11/24/2014)
Evil Kraig F (11/24/2014)
Jeff Moden (11/24/2014)
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/24/2014)
Just a quick question to "the thread", am I missing something or is XML getting more popular? Just noticed that this topic on the XML forum has proportionally many times the viewings of any other current topic.😎
I'd like to look at it as it just being forced down more people's throats but I can't because people at work are enamored with it. I've seen them use it in place of things like a decent and fairly simple lookup table and then tell me that I was being too critical of "normalization" to the point of calling me a Luddite when I demonstrated how simple the correct alternative would be.
I still laugh at XML. Don't get me wrong, it's intensely useful in certain circumstances, but in general, it's "new and shiny!".... no, it's not. It's the old mainframe row order dependent structures with standardized formats for everyone. XML is just cleaning up what we'd been fighting with for 40+ years since the Eniac first coughed related results.
*shrugs* To answer your question, Eirikur, it's getting more popular. I believe people have finally started to give up on JSON (anecdotal, I have no evidence) and are coming back to XML as a tamer alternative to actually coding data structures Cobb style.
I no longer laugh at XML. I cry when see it in a database table. The only thing that makes me cry more is EDI. Actually, that's a lie... some of the folks here have converted some of the EDI we recieve and have changed it to XML and then store both in the database. :sick:
Many of the EDI standards have in fact moved to XML and of course when imported unconverted into a database, result in a Double Trouble (not the SRV kind though)
😎
Oh my - such fond memories. I got the honor of working on an EDI project once about 10 or so years ago. {insert head tick and nervous twitch here} It was a very arcane and difficult data set to work with. Once you get done with the structure (envelopes, documents, etc.) and get to the actual structure, some things *may* be included or not and *may* be included once or many times. :w00t:
It was dictated to me that I used a commercial EDI package for the string parsing, but it was so old that it only supported XMODEN, YMODEM, etc. as communication protocols. I used the $20K-string parser, but had to write all the communication and transfer stuff myself. The "programming" of the string parser was clicking dropdowns in an interface that was buggy to produce a series of text files containing instructions. Even simple business rules had to be coded in a separate environment and then run against the output files. It was good to get it done and it worked. However, when everyone is completely afraid to touch any part of it because they don't understand it, I would not call it a good solution. This is a case when the political gamesmanship of management defined an unmaintainable solution. I was the only one who understood it and I didn't like it.
The memories of EDI work in the past are similar to the ones of the visits to the dentist, lot of pain, lot of money and forgotten as quickly as possible.
😎
+1000. I still have unpleasant memories of working on it. I'm hoping they continue to fade with time. 😉
November 25, 2014 at 6:45 am
Evil Kraig F (11/24/2014)
Jeff Moden (11/24/2014)
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/24/2014)
Just a quick question to "the thread", am I missing something or is XML getting more popular? Just noticed that this topic on the XML forum has proportionally many times the viewings of any other current topic.😎
I'd like to look at it as it just being forced down more people's throats but I can't because people at work are enamored with it. I've seen them use it in place of things like a decent and fairly simple lookup table and then tell me that I was being too critical of "normalization" to the point of calling me a Luddite when I demonstrated how simple the correct alternative would be.
I still laugh at XML. Don't get me wrong, it's intensely useful in certain circumstances, but in general, it's "new and shiny!".... no, it's not. It's the old mainframe row order dependent structures with standardized formats for everyone. XML is just cleaning up what we'd been fighting with for 40+ years since the Eniac first coughed related results.
*shrugs* To answer your question, Eirikur, it's getting more popular. I believe people have finally started to give up on JSON (anecdotal, I have no evidence) and are coming back to XML as a tamer alternative to actually coding data structures Cobb style.
Imagine if you will a successful niche company selling an RDBMS product for some years, short-cutting a significant usability upgrade by purchasing another company owning a product which in small-scale testing handled requirements very well. Preliminary testing with clients are promising. They like the product: it does what it's supposed to do and has a modern feel to it. Initial migrations from the old product to new throw up a few performance issues which are largely ignored - "we'll cross that bridge when we come to it". Full migrations however expose performance as a business-critical issue - some overnight batch processes which took a couple of hours on the old system are taking several times longer on the new product, and the difference is identified as XML manipulation taking much longer than regular tables. The product uses XML in place of normalised tables under the hood. Several rounds of intense performance enhancement recoding take place but the results are buggy and improvements are slight. Clients pull out. Everybody loses.
Someone should write this up as a case study white paper when the smoke clears.
So not shiny, not new, not clever, bl00dy tricky to code and criminally wasteful of disk space.
For fast, accurate and documented assistance in answering your questions, please read this article.
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
November 25, 2014 at 7:15 am
Gazareth (11/25/2014)
SQLRNNR (11/24/2014)
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/24/2014)
SQLRNNR (11/24/2014)
Jeff Moden (11/24/2014)
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/24/2014)
Just a quick question to "the thread", am I missing something or is XML getting more popular? Just noticed that this topic on the XML forum has proportionally many times the viewings of any other current topic.😎
I'd like to look at it as it just being forced down more people's throats but I can't because people at work are enamored with it. I've seen them use it in place of things like a decent and fairly simple lookup table and then tell me that I was being too critical of "normalization" to the point of calling me a Luddite when I demonstrated how simple the correct alternative would be.
Rather XML than JSON. Just sayin'!!
But yeah, XML is required more and more within SQL server.
....the pun of the missing "a":-D
😎
ROFL
Every time somebody says something about JSON, I always turn my head. At least with XML, I don't know anybody with a name that is even close to that.
A colleague's Ex, Emile. 🙂
Got me on that one:hehe:
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
November 25, 2014 at 11:26 am
Gazareth (11/25/2014)
SQLRNNR (11/24/2014)
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/24/2014)
SQLRNNR (11/24/2014)
Jeff Moden (11/24/2014)
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/24/2014)
Just a quick question to "the thread", am I missing something or is XML getting more popular? Just noticed that this topic on the XML forum has proportionally many times the viewings of any other current topic.😎
I'd like to look at it as it just being forced down more people's throats but I can't because people at work are enamored with it. I've seen them use it in place of things like a decent and fairly simple lookup table and then tell me that I was being too critical of "normalization" to the point of calling me a Luddite when I demonstrated how simple the correct alternative would be.
Rather XML than JSON. Just sayin'!!
But yeah, XML is required more and more within SQL server.
....the pun of the missing "a":-D
😎
ROFL
Every time somebody says something about JSON, I always turn my head. At least with XML, I don't know anybody with a name that is even close to that.
A colleague's Ex, Emile. 🙂
Schema violation?
😎
November 25, 2014 at 3:34 pm
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/25/2014)
Gazareth (11/25/2014)
SQLRNNR (11/24/2014)
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/24/2014)
SQLRNNR (11/24/2014)
Jeff Moden (11/24/2014)
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/24/2014)
Just a quick question to "the thread", am I missing something or is XML getting more popular? Just noticed that this topic on the XML forum has proportionally many times the viewings of any other current topic.😎
I'd like to look at it as it just being forced down more people's throats but I can't because people at work are enamored with it. I've seen them use it in place of things like a decent and fairly simple lookup table and then tell me that I was being too critical of "normalization" to the point of calling me a Luddite when I demonstrated how simple the correct alternative would be.
Rather XML than JSON. Just sayin'!!
But yeah, XML is required more and more within SQL server.
....the pun of the missing "a":-D
😎
ROFL
Every time somebody says something about JSON, I always turn my head. At least with XML, I don't know anybody with a name that is even close to that.
A colleague's Ex, Emile. 🙂
Schema violation?
😎
Invalid data insert causing a PK violation?
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
November 25, 2014 at 9:29 pm
Shifting gears real hard, could you good folks take a look at the following post? I think it's a really important subject even if I wasn't the one to start it and the CONNECT item could really use some votes to get MS to move off top dead center on it.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 25, 2014 at 10:06 pm
Jeff Moden (11/25/2014)
Shifting gears real hard, could you good folks take a look at the following post? I think it's a really important subject even if I wasn't the one to start it and the CONNECT item could really use some votes to get MS to move off top dead center on it.
Here is a link to the post
Now "thread", lets put some heavy weight on this!
😎
November 25, 2014 at 10:09 pm
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/25/2014)
Jeff Moden (11/25/2014)
Shifting gears real hard, could you good folks take a look at the following post? I think it's a really important subject even if I wasn't the one to start it and the CONNECT item could really use some votes to get MS to move off top dead center on it.Here is a link to the post
Now "thread", lets put some heavy weight on this!
😎
Wow... It's been a rough month. I can't believe that I forgot to post the link. Thank you very much for the cover, Eirikur.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 26, 2014 at 12:02 am
Jeff - do you happen to know what the vote count was before you posted your request to up-vote the connect item?
Wayne
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008
Author - SQL Server T-SQL Recipes
November 26, 2014 at 12:12 am
WayneS (11/26/2014)
..what the vote count was..
If I remember correctly it was 135 after my vote
😎
November 26, 2014 at 12:47 am
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/26/2014)
WayneS (11/26/2014)
..what the vote count was..If I remember correctly it was 135 after my vote
😎
Mine made it 143
-------------------------------Posting Data Etiquette - Jeff Moden [/url]Smart way to ask a question
There are naive questions, tedious questions, ill-phrased questions, questions put after inadequate self-criticism. But every question is a cry to understand (the world). There is no such thing as a dumb question. ― Carl Sagan
I would never join a club that would allow me as a member - Groucho Marx
November 26, 2014 at 3:26 am
SQLRNNR (11/25/2014)
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/25/2014)
Gazareth (11/25/2014)
SQLRNNR (11/24/2014)
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/24/2014)
SQLRNNR (11/24/2014)
Jeff Moden (11/24/2014)
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/24/2014)
Just a quick question to "the thread", am I missing something or is XML getting more popular? Just noticed that this topic on the XML forum has proportionally many times the viewings of any other current topic.😎
I'd like to look at it as it just being forced down more people's throats but I can't because people at work are enamored with it. I've seen them use it in place of things like a decent and fairly simple lookup table and then tell me that I was being too critical of "normalization" to the point of calling me a Luddite when I demonstrated how simple the correct alternative would be.
Rather XML than JSON. Just sayin'!!
But yeah, XML is required more and more within SQL server.
....the pun of the missing "a":-D
😎
ROFL
Every time somebody says something about JSON, I always turn my head. At least with XML, I don't know anybody with a name that is even close to that.
A colleague's Ex, Emile. 🙂
Schema violation?
😎
Invalid data insert causing a PK violation?
Uncommitable transaction!
November 26, 2014 at 6:59 am
Stuart Davies (11/26/2014)
Eirikur Eiriksson (11/26/2014)
WayneS (11/26/2014)
..what the vote count was..If I remember correctly it was 135 after my vote
😎
Mine made it 143
it's showing 147 right now, and when I tried to vote it up to 148, the website says "Voting is no longer enabled on this item" :angry:
---------------------------------------------------------
How best to post your question[/url]
How to post performance problems[/url]
Tally Table:What it is and how it replaces a loop[/url]
"stewsterl 80804 (10/16/2009)I guess when you stop and try to understand the solution provided you not only learn, but save yourself some headaches when you need to make any slight changes."
Viewing 15 posts - 46,456 through 46,470 (of 66,569 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply