Viewing 15 posts - 44,866 through 44,880 (of 59,101 total)
Heh... why can't you just remove the GO's?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 3, 2009 at 7:57 pm
I believe the question is how to capture/audit all rows from all tables anytime any of them suffers an insert/update/delete.
And, I agree... it's either the language barrier getting to me...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 3, 2009 at 7:55 pm
Dang smiley faces... I wish they wouldn't show up in code windows but still show in the rest of the post if desired. If you want to get rid...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 3, 2009 at 7:46 pm
Table B looks like a typical "mapping" table in a many-to-many relation ship. It must be populated manually since there's no way to accomplish the task automatically short of...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 3, 2009 at 7:43 pm
So you're trying to delete 300/30 or about 10 million rows per day? If you only delete 1000 rows every 10 minutes, that means that you would need 10,000...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 3, 2009 at 7:31 pm
tuyetmuadong (3/3/2009)
I want to distinct value on one column, but get all column of data. How is query in SQL 2000 ?
For example: I have a table PK003_INDEX(LINK,...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 3, 2009 at 7:19 pm
Thomas Mick (3/3/2009)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 3, 2009 at 7:16 pm
barunpathak (3/2/2009)
Outer APPLY worked guys. Thats a bunch for your help.
Two way street here... post your final code so we can enjoy it, please. 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 3, 2009 at 7:09 pm
Steve Jones - Editor (3/3/2009)
That's an interesting idea. Not sure how it will work with drywall and the studs, but something to look at.
Dab of hot melt glue about once...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 3, 2009 at 6:26 pm
john.arnott (3/3/2009)
In that regard, the two functions both now behave the same in providing a consistent result when referenced multiple times.
Of course it will... they've used the same GUID 3...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 3, 2009 at 4:40 pm
Bruce W Cassidy (3/3/2009)
[font="Verdana"]Do we get a pic of Lynn being "cannonised", and Jeff in a cardinal's frock?[/font]
Heh... there already was one somewhere in the more than 2100 posts on...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 3, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Greg Edwards (3/3/2009)
'What' are you tryinig to accomplish? at times can help get requirements out.
Tried that several times... That's about the time that some of the arrogant buggers come out...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 3, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Bob Hovious (3/3/2009)
As for my calling a "cursor" a dirty word.... I wasn't trying to...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 3, 2009 at 4:09 pm
But.... just to be clear, Dugi... this one doesn't have anything to with a Tally table... just good programming.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 3, 2009 at 3:36 pm
[font="Arial Black"]Dugi... [/font]if I may suggest, it's better to give someone no answer than to give them what might be one of the worst answers for replacing cursors. Temp...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 3, 2009 at 4:26 am
Viewing 15 posts - 44,866 through 44,880 (of 59,101 total)