Viewing 15 posts - 27,541 through 27,555 (of 59,101 total)
SQL Kiwi (2/9/2013)
Kwisatz78 (2/8/2013)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 9, 2013 at 10:11 pm
drew.allen (2/8/2013)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 9, 2013 at 3:33 pm
If the integer "times" that you have will be less than 24 hours, then the 4295818 number that you used appears to be "hundreths of seconds". If well multiply...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 9, 2013 at 2:54 pm
mjbkm (2/9/2013)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 9, 2013 at 2:42 pm
What the heck... let's go whole hawg and anticipate the next questions, as well, which will probably be...
1. Can we pivot the amounts, as well?
2. Can we get...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 9, 2013 at 2:24 pm
It's funny... my answer to this question would be the following...
SELECT [1],[2],[3],[4]
INTO dbo.SomePermanentTable
FROM (
SELECT...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 8, 2013 at 4:43 pm
I've been privileged to see some of the questions they ask on those exams. I could never pass such exams because I disagree with many of the answers. ...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 8, 2013 at 2:52 pm
Jonathan AC Roberts (1/22/2013)
The following lines in the SP exclude the primary key and any indexes that are created via adding a unique constraint rather than adding a unique index.
AND...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 8, 2013 at 8:07 am
bobie (2/7/2013)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 8, 2013 at 8:04 am
ChrisM@Work (2/5/2013)
Steven Willis (2/5/2013)
If this function is taking two hours to run--even with all of the cursors and subcursors--then you are probably accessing a LOT of data....
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 8, 2013 at 8:00 am
I actually haven't run into this particular problem with CDOSYS but have run into similar problems because someone forgot to destroy the sp_OA* objects that were created. Make sure...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 8, 2013 at 7:56 am
k.srikalyan (2/6/2013)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 6, 2013 at 1:03 pm
Markus S. Gallagher (2/5/2013)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 6, 2013 at 12:59 pm
opc.three (2/6/2013)
Anywhere in your code once you're done using the document.
Agreed with a qualifier... just as soon as you don't need the document to be in an open state anymore....
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 6, 2013 at 12:52 pm
sanjaytiwari31 (2/4/2013)
Can anybody tell me how to optimize this function or where is the problem.
Yes I can but you're not going to like it. The code cannot be optimized...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 5, 2013 at 5:10 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 27,541 through 27,555 (of 59,101 total)