MOT identity

Question

MOT identity

Steve Jones - SSC Editor

SSC Guru

Points: 734418
More actions
February 25, 2019 at 9:51 pm

#381559

Comments posted to this topic are about the item MOT identity

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

Stewart "Arturius" Campbell SSC Guru Points: 72496 More actions · Answer 1

Nice question, thanks Steve
once again, BOL is questionable....

____________________________________________
Space, the final frontier? not any more...
All limits henceforth are self-imposed.
“libera tute vulgaris ex”

paul s-306273 SSChampion Points: 10727 More actions · Answer 2

paul s-306273

SSChampion

Points: 10727

February 26, 2019 at 1:15 am

#2022934

Went for the documentation answer - 1 and 1.
Ouch!

HappyGeek SSCoach Points: 18726 More actions · Answer 3

paul s-306273 - Tuesday, February 26, 2019 1:15 AM
Went for the documentation answer - 1 and 1.
Ouch!

+1

...

Carlo Romagnano SSC-Insane Points: 22597 More actions · Answer 4

Steve Jones - SSC Editor - Monday, February 25, 2019 9:51 PM
Comments posted to this topic are about the item MOT identity

OPS! I don't find the updated documentation and I can't try it.

In the example script the clause "WITH (MEMORY_OPTIMIZED=ON)" is missing.

morlindk SSCrazy Points: 2294 More actions · Answer 5

Not quite correct. Try using 0 for increment Y. It is disallowed.

Shayn Thomas SSCertifiable Points: 5863 More actions · Answer 6

paul s-306273 - Tuesday, February 26, 2019 1:15 AM
Went for the documentation answer - 1 and 1.
Ouch!

+1

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The more you know, the more you know that you dont know

david.gugg SSCertifiable Points: 6031 More actions · Answer 7

Are you sure that's right? In the page the answer links to, I see this:

As others have pointed out, this documentation also contradicts your answer:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/relational-databases/in-memory-oltp/implementing-identity-in-a-memory-optimized-table?view=sql-server-2017

Thank you

[font="Tahoma"]Personal blog relating fishing to database administration:[/font]
[font="Comic Sans MS"]https://davegugg.wordpress.com[/url]/[/font]

mkdm Ten Centuries Points: 1092 More actions · Answer 8

This is what I get in SQL Server 2017 when I attempt to create a memory-optimized table with initial and increment both equal to 5:

darrenjacquet SSCommitted Points: 1577 More actions · Answer 9

I liked the question too and got it right but although 0 is a valid integer it is not ever valid for the increment "Y" value.

Scott Coleman One Orange Chip Points: 27452 More actions · Answer 10

I don't get it. All the documentation links posted say it has to be 1 and 1 for memory-optimized tables. The example posted above shows an error message stating it has to be 1 and 1. The code in the question does not include WITH(MEMORY_OPTIMIZED=ON) so technically anything could be used for the IDENTITY in just that fragment. But it is stated that memory-optimized is the intended goal and that fragment is not terminated with a semicolon. One would assume that WITH(MEMORY_OPTIMIZED=ON) is the next line after the code shown.

So where is the evidence that anything other than (1,1) works with memory optimized tables?

Steve Jones - SSC Editor SSC Guru Points: 734418 More actions · Answer 11

Apologies for this. I misplaced the testing script, but only 1 should be allowed.

Not sure what I was thinking.