SQL 2K5 - Table-Valued Parameters

Question

SQL 2K5 - Table-Valued Parameters

Viewing 6 posts - 16 through 20 (of 20 total)

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

SQLRNNR SSC Guru Points: 281334 More actions · Answer 1

Lynn Pettis (1/15/2010)
Mauve (1/15/2010)
Lynn Pettis (1/15/2010)
I don't read the QotD in the newsletter, I read it on SSC.
And it is best to answer later in the day as the question is usually rewritten, often totally different than what was put in the email.
Noticed that I have. Makes comments in discussion slightly confusing at times.

Only slightly confusing?

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

Jamie-2229 SSCrazy Eights Points: 8156 More actions · Answer 2

Seems so simple, but can be confusing... is this the purpose of symantics?

Jamie

ChiragNS One Orange Chip Points: 26137 More actions · Answer 3

confusing question. should have been worded better.

"Keep Trying"

Jamie-2229 SSCrazy Eights Points: 8156 More actions · Answer 4

I've often wished the QOTD in the email included the title and it can't be that hard to include it.

I often think of a format change but not necessarily this one. I find I have to slip in and out of the question itself when replying to be sure I'm not missing something stated in the question. It would be nice to see a copy of the question and answer(s) as the first comment for reference purposes.

Jamie

TomThomson SSC Guru Points: 104773 More actions · Answer 5

Kevin Gill (1/15/2010)
To my mind, this question could/should have been moderated and edited to make it clearer.
Even though I would have got it wrong had it actually been asking what I thought it was, the fact that it was pretty badly written added an additional, unnecessary level of misdirection that just gets in the way.
The 'correct' answer does not in itself actually answer the question - I have no more idea now than I had ten minutes ago whether table VARIABLES in SQL2K5 can be set to NULL, even though I did actually know that you can't have table parameters in SQL 2K5 (as they would have solved a lot of my problems last year). I skimmed the answers, thought 'I know SQL2K5 can have table variables' (I admit - misreading on my part but I assumed that if it was a 'trick' question then that answer would refer to all parts of the question equally, given that there's only single word answers for the other options) and gave some thought to whether a table VARIABLE can be set to NULL or not. I made my choice, got it wrong, but didn't actually find out the answer.
So can table variables be set to NULL? Perhaps this could be added to the explanation...

I agree that the full answer "table variables cannot be set to null and are not supported as SP parameters in SQL2005" wasn't provided. Of the three options given, only one was actually incorrect, the other two were each correct but not the whole truth, so that the only option for answering was to select one of them at random. So I think that the question with its three optional ansers was rather poor. I got the point anyway because I guessed that the questioner probably would think the lack of an enhancement was more significant than not being able to set table variables to null (which would be pointless thing to be able to do, because there's no concept of a null table in SQL Server so what would a table variable having value null mean?). But I think everyone who picked the wrong correct answer should have gotten a point too.

Tom

TomThomson SSC Guru Points: 104773 More actions · Answer 6

Mauve (1/15/2010)
Lynn Pettis (1/15/2010)
I don't read the QotD in the newsletter, I read it on SSC.
And it is best to answer later in the day as the question is usually rewritten, often totally different than what was put in the email.

It's a pity this one wasn't rewritten: the question asks whether table vaiables and parameters can be set to null, and it could easily be argued that "no they can't" is the only one of the three choices provided that actually answers the question as written. The fact that parameters are answered at all is a sort of a clue if one thinks "well what on earth were parameters mentioned for" and the heading (which as has already been mentioned isn't in the email) is another clue.

Tom