Viewing 15 posts - 46,141 through 46,155 (of 59,095 total)
Matt Whitfield (1/3/2009)
You are intensely cool. 1.796. And I'll agree with what was said above - i am most impressed by the way you got the data out of that...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 3, 2009 at 4:54 pm
Matt Whitfield (1/3/2009)
Phil Factor (1/3/2009)
The other thing I missed was the WITH FILLFACTOR = 100. Neat!
Erm... I think i'm missing something. Isn't 100 the default fillfactor for any...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 3, 2009 at 4:47 pm
Nope... I'm right there with you on some of the pig databases, especially considering the "time elements", we've both seen in this world.
And yes, I absolutely agree... there's a...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 3, 2009 at 4:36 pm
([font="Arial Black"]Be careful folks... [/font]if you're easily offended, there are some places on the referenced sight below that will knock your socks off.)
Heh... Not sure how I got to the...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 3, 2009 at 3:51 pm
I guess I do it backwards, then. I write out one "iteration" in regular code and test the willicurs out of it. Then, I just do a search...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 3, 2009 at 3:32 pm
jacroberts (1/3/2009)
This method sounds like a bit of a dark art.
Oh, it absolutely is... one that is condemned by many "experts" who have yet to get it to break. ...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 3, 2009 at 3:00 pm
And, yet, we go on without the ISO/IEC 9075 SQL2008 standard in SQL Server 2008 just as we have done without various other standards for zealots, lunatics, and database politicians...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 3, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Yeah... you're right, of course... I didn't think about those particular things... I think it's because I dream of a database where developers won't be dropping indexes out from under...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 3, 2009 at 2:14 pm
jacroberts (1/3/2009)
I take is that @PrevKeep variable is redundant as it doesn't seem to be used?
BWAA-HAAA!!! Well, at least I know someone read the code. Yes sir, I...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 3, 2009 at 2:06 pm
RBarryYoung (1/3/2009)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 3, 2009 at 2:01 pm
RBarryYoung (1/3/2009)
Jeff Moden (1/3/2009)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 3, 2009 at 1:41 pm
jacroberts (1/3/2009)
I will test both your...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 3, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Barry, coming from the likes of you, that's a totally awesome compliment. Thanks, ol' friend.
Just a hint about speed... I've found that SQL Server and I both have a...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 3, 2009 at 1:07 pm
tfifield (1/3/2009)
As I pointed out the sequence table is ugly and only works for a single insert. It should only be done when there are interactive inserts done by...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 3, 2009 at 12:26 pm
RBarryYoung (1/3/2009)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 3, 2009 at 12:18 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 46,141 through 46,155 (of 59,095 total)