Viewing 15 posts - 51,241 through 51,255 (of 59,098 total)
Matt Miller (4/7/2008)
That level of detail ain't going to help you much.
Matt... thanks for the help. You're right, though... not a big fan of CLRs but could be convinced...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 7, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Matija Lah (4/7/2008)
Almost. If there's a view of the same name in the current database then the local view will be used.
Thanks Matija Lah... I agree... that's why it's never...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 7, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Matt Miller (4/7/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 7, 2008 at 2:47 pm
meghna.bhargav (4/7/2008)
In sql , how it can be done?thanks
Like I said in my previous post, I don't think spreading a single header over 3 columns can be done. I...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 7, 2008 at 7:38 am
I don't know if it can be done in reporting services... header "cells" would need to be "merged" as if on a spreadsheet. I'm sure it can't be done...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 7, 2008 at 7:15 am
Sorry... I'm still not getting it and I want to make sure... you posted the following...
for item : A B
...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 7, 2008 at 7:00 am
Sergiy (4/6/2008)
Don't remember exactly how many rows were...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 7, 2008 at 6:52 am
rbarryyoung (4/7/2008)
Well, NOT IN has had some bugs in SQL Server 2000, so that is certainly possible. They are mostly cleared up in Sql2005.
What kind of bugs, Barry?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 7, 2008 at 6:51 am
You will never get an INDEX SEEK using SELECT *... only index scans.
My most sincere apologies... the comment above does NOT apply to INDEXED VIEWs.
What matters is what you...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 7, 2008 at 6:36 am
rbarryyoung (4/6/2008)
Jeff Moden (4/6/2008)
Heh... I handed Babbage gears 😉Good one. 🙂
I was serious about my Uncle though, he really did do all of that stuff.
I have no...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 7, 2008 at 5:57 am
Either way, you're going to annoy someone!
Not to worry... Anyone who actually takes the time to get upset at either isn't someone you have to worry about offending because, although...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 7, 2008 at 5:51 am
If it's temporary... (from Books Online)
SET IDENTITY_INSERT [ database_name . [ schema_name ] . ] table { ON | OFF }
If it's permanent removal you want, you'll need to define...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 6, 2008 at 11:42 pm
My apologies... see the following URL for how to make a Tally table...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/scripts/Advanced+SQL/62486/
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 6, 2008 at 11:27 pm
This is the second time this same question has been asked... and just like I said on that identical post, directly updating system tables is a form of "Death by...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 6, 2008 at 11:23 pm
We're getting there... in the example you just gave, should 1 2 3 be in a single column or 3 columns? If 3 columns, what shall be their names?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 6, 2008 at 11:19 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 51,241 through 51,255 (of 59,098 total)