U-SQL Built-In Types

  • Comments posted to this topic are about the item U-SQL Built-In Types

  • I learned something new today, so thanks.  I looked at the percentage of respondents who have gotten it right and surmise that others did the same research, reading and learning I did.  I suppose the other possibility is that I'm among the last individuals who haven't used U-SQL yet. 😉

  • Ed Wagner - Tuesday, January 31, 2017 5:42 AM

    I learned something new today, so thanks.  I looked at the percentage of respondents who have gotten it right and surmise that others did the same research, reading and learning I did.  I suppose the other possibility is that I'm among the last individuals who haven't used U-SQL yet. 😉

    heh... I've not used U-SQL yet either, but I thought most of those were not complex data types.  only the SQL.% ones were and then it was a guess on 2 out of the 3... I'd at least be half right :).  Got it correct then read about it.
    With the QOTD's, I tend to look at the question, guess on the answer then read the provided links (even if I was correct).  I do the research after answering the question.  I think of it kind of like a question on a test; you are given the test and a set of answers and if you looked things up online, you'd fail.
    The bad part about my method is that I miss out on a lot of points.
    I did like the question though.  I've not used U-SQL and I think I should learn it better soon.  Just looked it up and found a question on stack overflow about it and I realized I know nothing of U-SQL.  Mind you, reading the fourm posts here, I sometimes wonder if I even know T-SQL LOL.

  • I guess I am one of the few who work with Data Lake. Thanks, Steve!

  • bmg002 - Tuesday, January 31, 2017 7:24 AM

    heh... I've not used U-SQL yet either, but I thought most of those were not complex data types.  only the SQL.% ones were and then it was a guess on 2 out of the 3... I'd at least be half right :).  Got it correct then read about it.

    Well, I started from where you did, but it seemed obvious that no-one with their head screwed on would want SQL.HIERARCHY and I didn't think Ms was sufficiently stupid to pick that one over either of the others.  Mind you, that was a close thing with SQL.MAP being in there, because it strikes me as OO rather than RO (but the idea of SQL.HIERARCHY strikes me the same way, but much harder, so ...)

    Tom

  • Ed Wagner - Tuesday, January 31, 2017 5:42 AM

    I learned something new today, so thanks.  I looked at the percentage of respondents who have gotten it right and surmise that others did the same research, reading and learning I did.  I suppose the other possibility is that I'm among the last individuals who haven't used U-SQL yet. 😉

    +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

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

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