Viewing 15 posts - 42,586 through 42,600 (of 59,098 total)
Thanks Pete... My recommendation still stands... Use an IDENTITY column and have the students remember their "number". I don't know what Gaggle.net is, but let the students create their...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 3, 2009 at 8:19 pm
It's not quite that bad... with ANSI PADDING ON, VARCHAR can have trailing spaces if they've been assigned. It won't automatically pad spaces to the total width of the...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 3, 2009 at 2:59 am
jqd2001 (8/2/2009)
I do read all your guys comments and it is now hard to quote now:
(1) I am dealing with Crystal report in a closed sysetm so cannot have...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 3, 2009 at 1:36 am
I absolutely, positively would NOT write a script for it. Check Books Online for BCP.
And, I'm not 100% sure, but I believe that there's a "text server" or something...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 2, 2009 at 9:28 pm
Yep... I agree with that.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 2, 2009 at 9:22 pm
Heh... and I thought XML was supposed to make stuff easy. 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 2, 2009 at 9:13 pm
I don't believe that you'd put that in the HAVING... why not just put it in the WHERE clause?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 2, 2009 at 9:09 pm
I haven't tried it, but check out the following...
http://www.softempire.com/sql-server-repair.html
... without a backup, it's gonna cost you one way or the other.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 2, 2009 at 9:05 pm
I haven't actually done a measurement but I would say that a good reason NOT to do it would be performance just like doing a SELECT * causes performance problems...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 2, 2009 at 8:55 pm
From what I can see, there's no correlation between the UPDATE and the SELECT. How do the columns in the SELECT list relate to the table being updated?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 2, 2009 at 8:52 pm
Your are correct... cursors are definitely not needed here. Sounds like you did a pretty good job avoiding them and your method seems good. With that in mind,...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 2, 2009 at 8:47 pm
Lynn Pettis (8/2/2009)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 2, 2009 at 8:36 pm
As a sidebar... you might be a "novice_coder" in T-SQL but, from what I can see in this thread, you are not a "novice developer". Well done.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 2, 2009 at 7:25 pm
I also say that if you've broken it down to 10 procedures that there's nothing wrong with that... unless the procedures only handle one row at a time and then...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 2, 2009 at 7:19 pm
jqd2001 (8/2/2009)
Jeff (and I) was talking about Cursors and loops, not TVF's. ...there is no reason to believe that your only choices are cursor-based code or 1500-line procedures.
Barry,
For big...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 2, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 42,586 through 42,600 (of 59,098 total)