Viewing 15 posts - 44,506 through 44,520 (of 59,101 total)
Yeppp... couple/three things... first, it sounds like you may have a little "parameter sniffing" going on. Google'ing that will produce a pot wad of information on what it is...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 21, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Amit Lohia (3/18/2009)
Steve Jones - Editor (3/18/2009)
http://www.steverrobbins.com/articles/ceojob.htmSteve, in your own word please. One sentence.
Shoot... you don't need a whole bloody sentence... you can sum it all up in one word...
[font="Arial...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 21, 2009 at 4:02 pm
Sure... well, maybe except for the article thing. I was thinking that the idea of using a sequence table correctly would make a good article right after I wrote...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 21, 2009 at 3:31 pm
You've managed to hit the other area that I drop the sword and shield on for CLR deployment... file management. 😉
As you know, hierarchical data in SQL Server is a...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 21, 2009 at 3:17 pm
ab5sr (3/21/2009)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 21, 2009 at 11:38 am
You get no argument by me... I'd much rather use the highly scalable high performance method of using IDENTITY than going through all of the headaches of using the likes...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 21, 2009 at 11:28 am
... and, I apologize for not being able to help you with your original question.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 21, 2009 at 10:40 am
Giovanni (3/21/2009)
I know about the ever going discussion on pros/cons, dos/donts between CLR UDTs/UDs and T-SQL ones.
I must admit I am not a fan of religion wars, so I generally...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 21, 2009 at 10:38 am
Dangit... sorry folks... I posted in a hurry and left out the underscore in ROW_NUMBER(). Andrew has the correct code and I went back to my previous erroneous post...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 21, 2009 at 9:36 am
Lynn Pettis (3/20/2009)
Jeff Moden (3/20/2009)
If you did it your way, which numbers would be reserved if you needed 100 numbers as the increment?
You know, I was looking at it from...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 21, 2009 at 9:21 am
Heh... I agree... all of the technology is fasinating. But the thing that increases my productivity the most is... downtime. Even the hour long drive to work is...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 20, 2009 at 9:16 pm
cmaciasg (3/19/2009)
How could manage all that stuff dinamically? That is, If the columns aren´t 3, but many of them, col1, col2, col3, ...., coln....
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 20, 2009 at 9:05 pm
Then the query I included with my post should do it.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 20, 2009 at 9:02 pm
Florian Reischl (3/19/2009)
I've begun a new project and my predecessor used a char(10) field as the primary key in all tables. The key is generated by using the last 10...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 20, 2009 at 8:54 pm
My answer would be that the DBA chases you with a well equipped pork chop launcher until your heals smoke because you selected too much data. 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 20, 2009 at 8:45 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 44,506 through 44,520 (of 59,101 total)