Viewing 15 posts - 53,371 through 53,385 (of 59,089 total)
This needs to be run on-the-fly, by non-technical end users, maybe 5-10 times per day.
The newly-created database needs to be dropped after the routine is finished.
Why is this being done?...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 27, 2007 at 8:43 am
Oh my... we've gone from using a new function that (apparently) can't do the job, to using a Cursor...
Heh... Let's get back to the basics folks!
Consider the following PIVOT...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 27, 2007 at 8:20 am
Well said, Damon. Not are they only "Ambassadors", but "I always keep in the back of my mind that a DBA is the" first scape-goat when something goes wrong....
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 27, 2007 at 7:16 am
No problem... I absolutely agree with you... unnecessary overhead should always be avoided even if performance is ok for now... someday, the scale will change and if the code isn'tready...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 27, 2007 at 7:13 am
Heh... if you write the query right, you won't need a progress bar... it'll just be done.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 27, 2007 at 7:11 am
... and be limited to 4k bytes... 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 27, 2007 at 7:09 am
high hit volume GUI = very high volume OLTP 😀
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 27, 2007 at 5:35 am
The script that Minaz points out is for the data... not the table schema.
There is no way to audit changes/modifications to a table's schema in SQL Server 2000 through the...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 27, 2007 at 5:33 am
!! DIR C:\Temp
Not real sure I'm happy about THAT working because the following also works...
!! DEL C:\Temp\some file name
Great article of tips, Steve... thanks.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 27, 2007 at 5:26 am
Now that would be a good reason... can't see it making much of a difference in non-looping batch code, but I can see where it could make a heck of...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 27, 2007 at 5:14 am
Sure and understood... but, with proper indexing, good set based code, and the like, access will be extremely fast without having to go through a cache layer that needs to...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 27, 2007 at 5:04 am
I still need to see how you're calling the proc because that might be part of your problem...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 27, 2007 at 4:45 am
Heh... then there's shops like what I used to work for... I'd not only be the DBA, but I was also the OS guy, the guy that built the computer,...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 27, 2007 at 4:43 am
Understood... but the interviewer from Microsoft asked why it's better to list all of the columns than to use Select *...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 27, 2007 at 4:39 am
What would really be "cool" is Low Temperature Differential Stirling Engines. Design one that would work at 70-90oFd Diiferential (would be kinda large but light-weight) that would kick out...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
December 27, 2007 at 4:37 am
Viewing 15 posts - 53,371 through 53,385 (of 59,089 total)