Viewing 15 posts - 43,951 through 43,965 (of 59,063 total)
It would be a whole lot easier if you could use xp_CmdShell and BCP in a T-SQL loop. Are you allowed to use xp_CmdShell?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 29, 2009 at 10:55 pm
Just curious... what will this CLR Stored Procedure do?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 29, 2009 at 10:26 pm
Heh... oh my... someone is as crazy as I. Ya gotta be to know songs like that. 😛
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 29, 2009 at 10:20 pm
I ran into a server that had that many jobs, once. I disabled them all (except for know server maintenace) and would only turn them back on if someone...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 29, 2009 at 9:07 pm
Bob Griffin (4/29/2009)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 29, 2009 at 8:58 pm
john.arnott (4/29/2009)
Now, if we're lucky, someone can help us figure out a single pass solution.
Use two counters and a case statement in the SET.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 29, 2009 at 8:56 pm
m.berggren (4/29/2009)
DECLARE @counter int
SET @counter = 1
UPDATE custom.table1
SET @counter = table1.number = @counter+1
The problem with that is that you've included the table schema in the set clause. It should...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 29, 2009 at 8:54 pm
Sergiy (4/29/2009)
john.arnott (4/29/2009)
Now, if we're lucky, someone can help us figure out a single pass solution.
Solution was posted here many times, and Jeff Moden even made an article out of...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 29, 2009 at 8:45 pm
Amber.Brouillard (4/29/2009)
This is VERY useful information! Thanks for...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 29, 2009 at 8:41 pm
Nope... 23:59:59 misses almost a whole second of the day. The >= and < method is probably the best method there is.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 29, 2009 at 8:40 pm
Paul White (4/29/2009)
Jeff Moden (4/29/2009)
Thanks, Paul. I appreciate the feedback... didn't know you already knew about it.
😎 I didn't know that you didn't know I knew about it...over to...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 29, 2009 at 8:26 pm
Paul White (4/29/2009)
Jeff Moden (4/29/2009)
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/T-SQL/63003/
Thanks Jeff,
I have read that before, and use that approach currently.
When Adam asked for ideas to extend the string-split, this came to mind.
It would be interesting...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 29, 2009 at 7:55 pm
Ok, here we go... Assuming that you have the company name in a variable and the fact that you're using a version of T-SQL that cannot use functions, here's how...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 29, 2009 at 7:30 pm
Paul White (4/28/2009)
Florian Reischl (4/28/2009)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 29, 2009 at 6:06 pm
jim.rasmussen (4/28/2009)
Yes it does. I have researched this, but can't seem to make it work correctly. Any thoughts?Thanks
Jim
Sorry, Jim... I had almost 900 emails in my inbox since I posted...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 29, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 43,951 through 43,965 (of 59,063 total)