Viewing 15 posts - 346 through 360 (of 471 total)
Yes, interesting question. Can be fooled by the fact that ...
SELECT len (@str),@str
Returns:
----------- ----------
5 1, 2,
...with a...
September 10, 2009 at 9:50 am
Yes, please explain the difference between answers 1 and 2 because it is very subtle.
August 21, 2009 at 8:05 am
Implicit type conversions have been shown to work differently from one SQL Server version to another. We had a question recently that exposed this behavior. We witnessed it...
August 19, 2009 at 8:34 am
If you rely on implicit conversion, is it going to convert the CHAR to DATETIME or DATETIME to CHAR? You are never really sure so you explicitly convert...
August 19, 2009 at 7:34 am
Mark Horninger (8/19/2009)
Actually, you could do an implicit or explicit conversion....
I agree. That was my first thought as well.
August 19, 2009 at 7:30 am
I have always been able to fix the broken database. I restore the backup with a new name and then drop and recreate any broken tables from the restored...
August 19, 2009 at 7:24 am
I would highly recommend you watch Paul Randal's TechED presentation.
August 18, 2009 at 11:21 am
Thanks for the explanation. I missed that 'Statistics' was in the last answer. When I first read the answers I thought you were saying that is...
August 17, 2009 at 11:27 am
Five people got the question correct so far, I am not sure how that happened.
August 17, 2009 at 10:00 am
I set the default fill factor at %90. Then for tables which have static data that does not change much on a daily basis I explicitly set the...
August 17, 2009 at 9:47 am
So what kind of an error message does the author recieve when running CHECKDB agains the tempdb? I am not seeing it.
August 17, 2009 at 9:13 am
mtassin (8/6/2009)
Here's how to write the True/False type statements to work within the context of the question
I agree. I was torn by DBCC CHECKDB, REPAIR_ALLOW_DATA_LOSS answer becuase it didn't...
August 6, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Hugo Kornelis (8/5/2009)
August 5, 2009 at 9:39 am
Yes, really nice question that illustrates the perils of naming a stored procedure using the naming convention 'sp_' which is used for system stored procedures.
August 4, 2009 at 8:48 am
Viewing 15 posts - 346 through 360 (of 471 total)