Noise

Question

Noise

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 30 total)

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

Ernie Schlangen SSCrazy Points: 2382 More actions · Answer 1

kapil_kk (10/15/2012)
As sql server version was not specified so I selected NoiseList but got wrong...
I think version should be mentioned in question..
learn new thing today.......

+1

sestell1 SSChampion Points: 10230 More actions · Answer 2

Nice question!

I would have gotten this wrong without some research. The name seems counter-intuitive, doesn't it?

mtassin SSC-Insane Points: 23099 More actions · Answer 3

I knew what they were, but I couldn't remember the nomenclature. So I popped open BOL and searched for noise words. Which took me to the stopwords area and then I didn't bother to read very hard (forgot coffee).

Ah well... getting it wrong when you're on the right answer but too tired to read, gives you what you deserver I suppose.

--Mark Tassin
MCITP - SQL Server DBA
Proud member of the Anti-RBAR alliance.
For help with Performance click this link[/url]
For tips on how to post your problems[/url]

Mike Is Here Hall of Fame Points: 3348 More actions · Answer 4

Mike Is Here

Hall of Fame

Points: 3348

October 16, 2012 at 7:41 am

#1549562

Thanks Easy Question.

call.copse SSCoach Points: 18216 More actions · Answer 5

Bah humbug - by which you may take it that I had not kept up on this subject. I would have researched it if the version had been specified as I had not realised it was a change. I think including the version would have made it less 'trick'-y.

Steve Jones - SSC Editor SSC Guru Points: 738917 More actions · Answer 6

Aleksl-294755 (10/16/2012)
I concur with kapil190588 that the version should somehow be mentioned.
Please see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms142551(v=sql.90).aspx - noise-word list (LIST!)

Not the same thing, and it's not current terminology. If you were to talk to anyone today about FTS, Stop lists would be the term used, regardless of what was in place in 2005. That document also references noise word files, and noise word lists, not noise lists. I would say that based on my experience working with the versions, the "noise word list" is a typo in that documentation.

We can't build questions that are completely backwards compatible.

Michael Valentine Jones SSC Guru Points: 64818 More actions · Answer 7

Specifying the versions would be good because it's hard to tell years later which versions an old question was meant for.

sestell1 SSChampion Points: 10230 More actions · Answer 8

Michael Valentine Jones (10/16/2012)
Specifying the versions would be good because it's hard to tell years later which versions an old question was meant for.

Hmm, that's a pretty good point actually.

It makes sense to assume the current version of SQL Server with default settings for the current question, but that's something that could become unclear over time should older questions come up in a search (or if you are answering old questions in your spare time).

SQLRNNR SSC Guru Points: 281344 More actions · Answer 9

Steve Jones - SSC Editor (10/16/2012)
...
We can't build questions that are completely backwards compatible.

+1

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

@Cassie SSC Eights! Points: 890 More actions · Answer 10

@Cassie

SSC Eights!

Points: 890

October 16, 2012 at 10:39 am

#1549681

Mention SQL version anyway!

Koen Verbeeck SSC Guru Points: 259197 More actions · Answer 11

Nice question, thanks!

Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP

kapil_kk SSC-Insane Points: 21316 More actions · Answer 12

thanks for the explanation from all you guys..

_______________________________________________________________
To get quick answer follow this link:
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/

kapil_kk SSC-Insane Points: 21316 More actions · Answer 13

good explanation

_______________________________________________________________
To get quick answer follow this link:
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/

Iulian -207023 SSCertifiable Points: 7639 More actions · Answer 14

Thank you for the question, good to see one on full text indexing

Iulian

MisplacedChildhood Ten Centuries Points: 1345 More actions · Answer 15

Hugo Kornelis (10/16/2012)
okbangas (10/16/2012)
kapil190588 (10/15/2012)
As sql server version was not specified so I selected NoiseList but got wrong...
I think version should be mentioned in question..
learn new thing today.......
If it were different in two supported editions of SQL Server, I agree. However, SQL Server 2005 is not supported anymore, so this question is correct for all supported editions of SQL Server.
When I saw the question and the list of answers, I *knew* there would be debate over this.
However, I agree with Okbangas - the question is fine without mentioning the version. And not just because SQL Server 2005 is out of date. I might have at least somewhat concurred with Kapil if that were the only argument. However, the "correct" answer for SQL Server 2005 and before was not included.
In SQL Server 2005, the words to be ignored were called "noise words". But lists of those words were not ever called "noise lists" - they were called "noise word files". So even those who have only experience with SQL Server 2005 and prior should have been able to realize that a name change had happened, and that they needed to do more research.
I think this was a great question, Steve! 🙂

I, like Hugo, knew it used to be noise words, but then I got a feeling somthing changed! Glad I read up and got it right