Viewing 15 posts - 496 through 510 (of 825 total)
Old stuff!
Dynamic sql will run better.
April 18, 2013 at 12:59 am
sfayer (4/12/2013)
kapil_kk (4/12/2013)
"You can create three payload types in SQL Server 2012: TCP, Service Broker, and Database Mirroring endpoints. SOAP endpoints were removed in SQL Server 2012."
When...
April 12, 2013 at 3:49 am
I suggest for next authors to keep in mind few rules:
1 Be simple
2 Be clear
3 Be synthetic
April 4, 2013 at 2:34 am
baabhu (4/3/2013)
option B.
Query 1 will return all rows of table 1 and Query 2 will return...
April 4, 2013 at 1:12 am
These conversions are non deterministic, but from string to date:
from BOL:
Certain datetime Conversions Are Nondeterministic in SQL Server 2005 and Later Versions
In SQL Server 2000, string to date and time...
March 22, 2013 at 3:41 am
L' Eomot Inversé (3/20/2013)
demonfox (3/20/2013)
Danny Ocean (3/20/2013)
Good question.In real life scenario, we need to take care of cascade option.
I prefer not to have delete cascade on design .. to let...
March 20, 2013 at 4:53 am
I do not like "[OrderID] [int] NULL," in the [OrderDetail],
so you can insert orphan records despite the constraint.
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[OrderDetail]
(
[OrderDetailID] [int] NOT NULL,
[OrderID] [int] NULL,
CONSTRAINT [PK_OrderDetail] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED...
March 20, 2013 at 2:34 am
okbangas (3/15/2013)
Really easy question, but the explanation puzzles me. As far as I can see it is no implicit conversion, just a pure integer division.
+1
March 15, 2013 at 2:21 am
okbangas (3/13/2013)
Learned something new here, and by the way, the reference should be:
Good!
March 13, 2013 at 1:59 am
cppprogrammer (3/12/2013)
Yes statistically low probability but rows *can* be returned if SYSDATETIME() and GETDATE() at a particular time are equal. The "correct" answer is not correct.
+1
Correct answer is "Dates which...
March 12, 2013 at 2:06 am
Lokesh Vij (3/7/2013)
Must include an ORDER BY clause when a TOP clause is specified.
I think this statements should be "Must include an TOP clause when a ORDER BY clause is...
March 8, 2013 at 1:57 am
Dineshbabu (3/5/2013)
Hugo Kornelis (3/5/2013)
Good question, and good explanation. Well done!First time I'm seeing Hugo's post without any information.
We are waiting for "L'èmot est inversée", Tom for friends!
😀
March 5, 2013 at 4:11 am
Viewing 15 posts - 496 through 510 (of 825 total)