Viewing 15 posts - 2,446 through 2,460 (of 4,081 total)
I hope Jeff never sees this thread...
You mean Cardinal Moden of the SQL Inquisition? :w00t::w00t::w00t:
September 3, 2009 at 10:51 am
-- Dear Lord, why am I using a cursor here?
Your penance is 10 Hail Mary's and 10 Our Father's.
Go and sin no more.
September 3, 2009 at 9:46 am
If you write a stored procedure with parameters, you can right click on the procedure in SMSS and select the Execute Stored Procedure option. You will...
September 3, 2009 at 8:31 am
September 3, 2009 at 8:10 am
Because they didn't write the language to allow it that way.
September 3, 2009 at 8:06 am
I'm curious too, so please answer Gail's question.
You can get the number you want by means of a subquery which sums all the previous IDs,...
September 3, 2009 at 7:02 am
The nice thing about Lowell's CASE solution is that it could lead you to get away from the CURSOR entirely, which is always a happy thing.
September 3, 2009 at 6:49 am
Is your intent to store the resulting concatenated address in the target table or to store the various components? I always prefer storing the components, because it...
September 3, 2009 at 6:45 am
The best way I can think of to handle this is with a CASE expression to build the address1 column. Instead of doing this in a stored procedure, you...
September 2, 2009 at 8:19 pm
Many thanks. 🙂
September 2, 2009 at 3:40 pm
Flo, I had never heard of that before. How did you come across it?
September 2, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Seems like it would be a heck of a lot easier to just know your source data, and where it is ultimately going to be stored. There is...
September 1, 2009 at 4:50 pm
Nope.
September 1, 2009 at 4:30 pm
You're welcome, and thanks for the feedback. Good luck to you.
September 1, 2009 at 4:25 pm
Arrrg!!!
Chris, I totally lost track of this. My sincere apologies. I will look hard at it tonight.
September 1, 2009 at 3:40 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 2,446 through 2,460 (of 4,081 total)