Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 316 through 330 (of 369 total)

  • RE: Replacing TVFs with CTEs

    I had the same thought when I upgraded to SQL Server 2005.

    I have a TVF to return just the "key" data in my hierarchical tree structure. It uses the...

  • RE: SQL SERVER 2005 vs ORACLE 10G

    Jeff Moden (1/8/2008)


    JohnG (1/8/2008)


    Definately NOT true. Oracle stores two digits per byte (plus an overhead byte or two for sign, etc.) in a varying storage model. Equivalent to...

  • RE: SQL SERVER 2005 vs ORACLE 10G

    Tony Mungor (1/8/2008)


    I think it is interesting how when push comes to shove you can sell a SQL Server application/solution to an Oracle shop, but there is no way you...

  • RE: SQL SERVER 2005 vs ORACLE 10G

    You'll also love the fact that "INT" and all the Numeric data types take up the same number of storage bytes no matter how big or small you define them...

  • RE: SQL SERVER 2005 vs ORACLE 10G

    It is REALLY REALLY unusual to find a TRUE EXPERT at both systems when each are as complex and feature-packed as SQL Server and Oracle.

    Generally true. You pick your...

  • RE: SQL SERVER 2005 vs ORACLE 10G

    SQL Server does not have case sensitive names but will still name the object with any case used in the Create statement which is great for documentation and readability purposes

    The...

  • RE: SQL SERVER 2005 vs ORACLE 10G

    Steve Jones - Editor (1/7/2008)


    I'm not an Oracle guy, but isn't Oracle optimized for cursors? Isn't that it's strength when working through sets of data?

    If so, then does it matter...

  • RE: SQL SERVER 2005 vs ORACLE 10G

    OK, now we're onto a religious debate.

    Having worked since 1984 with relational databases (see bio) -- initially with IBM's DB2 when it first came out (early 1980s) then working with...

  • RE: The SQL * Wildcard

    My 2-cents on this is that it is probably some unique "quirk" in SQL Server (version unspecified). What version? 7, 2000, 2005, 2008?

    I've seen stuff like this before (in...

  • RE: Stored Proc passing Table Name Fails - Help

    ... and be limited to 4k bytes...

    Jeff,

    In SQL Server 2005, sp_executesql is NOT limited to 4K (NVARCHAR(4000)) characters. You can use NVARCHAR(MAX).

  • RE: Primary Key

    The other "unique" constraints are often called "Alternate Keys" (AK in the IDEF1X data modeling notation).

    Consider the following simple example:

    Countries, per the ISO 3166 specification can be identified by:

    - Name...

  • RE: The SQL * Wildcard

    Always select just the columns that you need.

    I've seen more code/applications break due to SELECT * vs. SELECT column1, column2, etc.

    The tables in application systems are never permanant. Changes...

  • RE: Update Rowcount

    I agree with Nebojsa.

    Use a return (OUTPUT) parameter as it is a much cleaner solution. You're calling a procedure and not a function. In coding, procedures are not...

  • RE: Stored Proc passing Table Name Fails - Help

    Use the built-in stored procedure sp_executesql vs. just plain EXECUTE. Then you can pass your variable as a parameter without having to cast it as a string.

    Additional benefits:

    - reusable...

  • RE: Table name from variable in select statement

    Rather than casting/converting all of the WHERE clause values into the dynamic SQL query string you should be using the system stored procedure sp_executesql vs. just plain EXECUTE. The...

Viewing 15 posts - 316 through 330 (of 369 total)