Viewing 15 posts - 3,766 through 3,780 (of 6,041 total)
Grant Fritchey (6/9/2015)
ericpap (6/9/2015)
Alvin Ramard (6/9/2015)
ericpap (6/9/2015)
Alvin Ramard (6/9/2015)
Have you discussed...
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 9, 2015 at 1:16 pm
If you're on LinkedIn, then I'm surprised you're only been contacted by "a couple" of recruiters. You must have neglected to mention "SQL Server" somewhere in your profile.
But personally...
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 9, 2015 at 1:11 pm
ericpap (6/9/2015)
Alvin Ramard (6/9/2015)
ericpap (6/9/2015)
Alvin Ramard (6/9/2015)
Have you discussed this problem...
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 9, 2015 at 12:59 pm
Lynn Pettis (6/9/2015)
Would be nice if Microsoft brought partitioning to all editions of SQL Server, well, maybe not Express but it wouldn't hurt for people experimenting.
I use a local install...
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 9, 2015 at 12:27 pm
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (6/9/2015)
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 9, 2015 at 8:57 am
Jeff Moden (6/9/2015)
Eric M Russell (6/9/2015)
Jeff Moden (6/8/2015)
Andy Warren (6/8/2015)
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 9, 2015 at 8:51 am
This reminds me of a discussion from a few months back:
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/FindPost1673628.aspx
One approach is sliding window table partitioning. The rows can also age off into a ReadOnly partition. All rows can...
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 9, 2015 at 8:34 am
I'm assuming the goal here is to have USD_Sales populated only on the lowest ranked row within a group.
I've found the simplest, most flexible, and often the most performant approach...
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 9, 2015 at 8:16 am
Barcelona10 (6/8/2015)
I think i should go with EXCEPT
If you want to return a result of rows from one set that are not included in another set, then EXCEPT is the...
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 9, 2015 at 7:55 am
Jeff Moden (6/8/2015)
Andy Warren (6/8/2015)
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 9, 2015 at 7:50 am
DonlSimpson (6/8/2015)
Lynn Pettis (6/8/2015)
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 8, 2015 at 2:33 pm
Reply back with a simplified example of what the query result would look like.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 8, 2015 at 1:50 pm
Barcelona10 (6/8/2015)
CHECKSUM_AGG compares one column at the time.
If you want to calculate a checksum across multiple columns and rows, then you can can wrap checksum_agg() around checksum() like this:
checksum_agg(...
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 8, 2015 at 1:44 pm
Or like you said originally, this could be done using INSTEAD OF triggers.
For example, you could create a ClosedPeriods table containing one row for each closed period. Using this method...
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 8, 2015 at 12:44 pm
bimplebean (6/8/2015)
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 8, 2015 at 12:10 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 3,766 through 3,780 (of 6,041 total)