Viewing 15 posts - 47,746 through 47,760 (of 59,095 total)
Shree (10/14/2008)
Sorry, actually I posted in the wrong forum before. I didn’t find the option to delete the topic. Anyway Madhivanan helped me by giving me this article link.
That's a...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 14, 2008 at 7:16 pm
noeld (10/14/2008)
By this time I think the PO is not longer with us (no pun intended)
Heh, agreed. It's a shame, too. I would have liked to take a...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 14, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Dang... I gotta learn to read all the new posts before I reply...
Richard Fryar's fine solution is a dynamic solution that will work fine in SQL Server 2005.
Heh... if you...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 14, 2008 at 7:00 pm
jon.malenfant (10/14/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 14, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Charles Kincaid (10/14/2008)
It's practically impossible to meaningful queries as you have seen.
But, "practically" and "is" are two different things... 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 14, 2008 at 6:55 pm
peter (9/30/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 14, 2008 at 6:41 pm
GF (10/14/2008)
I do have a question as I am trying to apply your solution to my needs.
I have hundreds of addresses in a single address...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 14, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Still, the code is doomed to be comparatively slow because of the loops. If we knew the actual problem this was supposed to solve, perhaps we could find a...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 14, 2008 at 5:26 am
rgillings,
Thanks for the feedback, I appreciate it. If you really want to get a handle on that particular logic, take a gander at the article in the link I...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 14, 2008 at 5:21 am
amit (10/14/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 14, 2008 at 5:15 am
Heh... this has been a lot of fun, but the funny thing about this whole thing is that people keep talking about everything except the original post.
Yes, I agree that...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 14, 2008 at 5:05 am
You need to include the intial value of @j-2 in the @I loop or it just counts down in one iteration of @I and stays there.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 13, 2008 at 9:11 pm
You should tell us why you'll need nested While loops... typically, that's a recipe for a huge RBAR performance problem and it can usually be avoided. 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 13, 2008 at 9:05 pm
:hehe:
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 13, 2008 at 8:53 pm
ayemya (10/13/2008)
I found a way to make it works. I have to close this question.
You should continue the question because you're still using a loop and a function to do...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 13, 2008 at 8:03 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 47,746 through 47,760 (of 59,095 total)