Michael Riemer (10/10/2013)
Although easy if you know it and logical if you don't (since the other three aren't actually database tasks).
I don't think the documentation is very clear in highlighting the limitation, as the first bullet point explains:
Specify the OLE DB connection manager to connect to the destination SQL Server database and the table or view into which data is inserted. The Bulk Insert task supports only OLE DB connections for the destination database.
This can be kind of misleading when referencing only OLE DB, since you can access most databases through OLE DB. It may be worth expanding on the fact that it references the SQL Server Bulk Insert functionality, which isn't present on other databases.
I think somehow that "OLE DB connection manager ot connect to the destination SQL Server database" kind of gives it away, since "the destination SQL Server database" is an SQL Server database and hence not an Oracle or Postgres or DB2 or anything else database except an SQL Server database. 😀
Anyway, an alternative reference would have been http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms139892%28v=sql.105%29.aspx/css which classes the tasks in an interesting way, and shows Bulk Insert Task as the first task of the "Sql Server Task" type, and the only one of the list in todays question which is in the list for that type. Of course that's SQL 2008 documentation (the SQL 2008 R2 version of that page is pretty much the same) and teh sql Server 2012 version of th epage has thrown away that useful classification (it lists the types, but doesn't say which tasks beong to any of them, which is not exactly helpful). So although that alternative reference would perhaps have been a better one for 2008 and/or 2008 R2 the reference given in the explanation is actually better on that page because the information is preserved in the 2012 version, instead of thrown away. I find it hard to think why useful information in BoL does that sort of disappearing act every now and again, perhaps someone in the BoL team doesn't like giving too much information an=bout sql Server away. :angry: