Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 530 total)
This is interesting!
I must surely try this. Thanx for the tip!
May 16, 2006 at 12:06 pm
Haha. I wish I had did a search before I started on the trek of finding a solution
Thanx
May 16, 2006 at 7:27 am
Speed is not a one way measure. Remember that not all things that are slower then others are inherently bad.
May 16, 2006 at 6:41 am
You did not mention how big percentage of the total number of table rows are affected by your UPDATE statement?
I assume here that you want to update all (100%)...
May 16, 2006 at 6:36 am
And just to point out some details. If you do not care for the ordering of the data amongst the two tables you do not need to add (or use)...
May 16, 2006 at 4:19 am
Okay. Finally. Overflow = 17575999 + 1
And this is the working trigger:
CREATE TRIGGER i_customidentity
ON tbl_custom_identity
FOR INSERT
AS
UPDATE tbl_custom_identity
SET Custom_Key =
CHAR (ASCII ('A') + (Increment - Increment %...
May 16, 2006 at 4:00 am
Edit: This solution does not work either...
Okay. Try the below trigger instead. It should work in all cases (except for all the cases when the algorith overflows). You can either...
May 16, 2006 at 2:14 am
The algorithm you found seems even worse after the second glance. If you substitute 999 as 'Increment' you get: BgK109 which does not seem at all correct.
May 16, 2006 at 2:02 am
Do have a look at this article:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;311231&sd=tech
Especially:
Outlook 2000 works with either an Exchange server or an Internet mail server. You must have Outlook 2000 installed with the Corporate or Workgroup...
May 16, 2006 at 1:35 am
Yes. That is because your Outlook is using Exchange
May 16, 2006 at 1:25 am
If you do not have exchange, sql mail does not work in SQL Server 2000.
You can use this SP (just with SMTP servers) which was priorly posted here (should still...
May 15, 2006 at 9:00 am
Hello.
If you are still here maybe this can help you:
//Hanslindgren
May 4, 2006 at 10:02 am
If the DB is going to be just one (only working with enormous data warehouses), I usually set the file size to the available disc space at once. That way...
May 4, 2006 at 9:20 am
I would just point out that ICSharpCode.SharpZipLib, as of writing time, has a nasty drawback; ICSharpCode.SharpZipLib does not support any files greater then 4GB.
May 4, 2006 at 9:11 am
Hi Stephen!
Thank you, it is not always you get such an exhausting feedback of how things turn out when you post replies and hope you can help.
Hanslindgren
April 28, 2006 at 4:02 am
Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 530 total)