Viewing 15 posts - 18,886 through 18,900 (of 59,072 total)
MadAdmin (12/21/2015)
Jeff Moden (12/20/2015)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 21, 2015 at 8:04 am
To be honest, I use a combination of triggers and staging tables with a job to move the data from the staging tables to their targets in a sort of...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 21, 2015 at 7:56 am
roger.plowman (12/21/2015)
Good, fast, and cheap, pick any two...
Always include "Good". Fast and cheap usually follow auto-magically.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 21, 2015 at 7:43 am
ciskypete (12/21/2015)
Jeff Moden (12/18/2015)
ciskypete (12/18/2015)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 21, 2015 at 7:37 am
jasona.work (12/21/2015)
Jeff Moden (12/20/2015)
jasona.work (12/18/2015)
Ed Wagner (12/18/2015)
jasona.work (12/18/2015)
Starting 7 working days before X-Mas,...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 21, 2015 at 7:31 am
Not sure but I believe that the following command may do the trick...
sp_removedbreplication [ [ @dbname = ] 'dbname' ]
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2015 at 8:12 pm
WhiteLotus (12/20/2015)
I also run OPEN TRAN to check if there is any open transaction
It said :
Transaction information for database...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2015 at 8:07 pm
Excellent description in your post. The only thing that was missing was actual readily consumable data. I've included that in my response but see the first link under...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2015 at 7:05 pm
It sounds an awful lot like someone has a runaway query going on. What does sp_Who2 have to say about disk IO for currently active transactions?
EXEC sp_Who2 ACTIVE
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2015 at 6:07 pm
Jason A. Long (12/20/2015)
(I haven't... But I'd like to... and I don't care...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2015 at 5:41 pm
Luckbox72 (12/20/2015)
When I run the numbers through a .net version I get the correct results.
If that's true, why not turn the .Net version into an SQLCLR function or stored procedure?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2015 at 5:29 pm
Oooooh! I could have a lot of fun with that...
"Trained Code Monkey! Faithful and Agile friend. Never code alone again. Likes all sorts of code. ...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2015 at 5:07 pm
Jason A. Long (12/20/2015)
LOL... NULLs eh? Are you referring to "Missing & Applicable" or "Missing & Not applicable"? I think that's up there with religion & politics... 😛
I was thinking...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2015 at 4:56 pm
Gosh. The SPAM doesn't seem as bad as it was a couple of weekends ago but it's still about a quarter of the posts that are up right now....
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2015 at 4:44 pm
I absolutely agree with the technical idea of columns supporting only one type of data in order to actually be a "result set" even in reports. I've even written...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 20, 2015 at 4:23 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 18,886 through 18,900 (of 59,072 total)