Viewing 15 posts - 54,286 through 54,300 (of 59,089 total)
karthikeyan (11/7/2007)
I am using sql2000. Both gave me the same output.
Yes... for simple queries they will work the same... for not so simple queries with many criteria, *= will surprise...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 7, 2007 at 6:32 am
The answer is, no... Within a given SELECT, Rand is not RAND unless it has a random seed... the only thing in SQL Server that even comes close to being...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 7, 2007 at 6:25 am
jim (11/6/2007)
...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 7, 2007 at 6:21 am
Perfect use of "divide and conquer"... nicely done...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 7, 2007 at 6:17 am
(Unless of course you can exploit Jeff's idea of storing per-prepared results in a table...)
I'm glad you brought that up, Ed... using recurrsion to come up with the same or...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 7, 2007 at 6:15 am
??? Recursion has some disadvantages compared to what? And, I'm confused... tell me again why you would use a Factorial function in conjunction with forum messages :blink:
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 6, 2007 at 10:41 pm
Ah... got it. Thanks...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 6, 2007 at 10:26 pm
You bet... thanks for the feedback. Gotta love those "3rd party vendors". 😛 Only reason I knew how to do this is because I had to fix one...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 6, 2007 at 10:11 pm
winston Smith (11/6/2007)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 6, 2007 at 10:07 pm
Henry Omodara (11/6/2007)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 6, 2007 at 10:00 pm
Not to over simplify too much... but why don't you just use CASE statements?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 6, 2007 at 9:56 pm
Ummm.... how does putting it into extended properties make it any more accurate than putting it in a header comment? Sure, I understand it make it more accessible, but...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 6, 2007 at 9:45 pm
The SSIS package should be able to check if incoming rows already exist previously, perform updates if there were changes on any columns, and insert a new row if data...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 6, 2007 at 9:43 pm
True enough... and nicely done. I was being a bit sarcastic because the OP didn't want to use a stored procedure... I went a bit overboard with a way...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 6, 2007 at 9:10 pm
Duplicate post...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic419299-266-1.aspx
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
November 6, 2007 at 9:02 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 54,286 through 54,300 (of 59,089 total)