Viewing 15 posts - 54,421 through 54,435 (of 59,098 total)
I agree with Jason... I think ISDATE, by itself, is a very bad way to check for valid dates. For example, the following all return "1" using ISDATE...
[font="Courier New"]SELECT...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 27, 2007 at 5:55 pm
Any import will fail if someone has the sheet open... in my opinion, best way to do this is to make a macro on the spreadsheet to export the correct...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 27, 2007 at 1:22 pm
David,
"Dropping the time" should be done on the display side of things... not on the import side of things. Reason being is that the only way you can truly...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 27, 2007 at 1:19 pm
But I am still curious as to why my UDF didn't work.
Your UDF works... but think about it... what do you get when you concatenate a NULL with...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 27, 2007 at 9:09 am
Just a personal opinion...
I think you may be trying to do too much in a UDF. I think the UDF should do nothing but find the number you're looking...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 27, 2007 at 8:37 am
The picture of what you wanted in your first post is not visible.
Layout some text on the next post that depicts the format that you would like. Use the...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 27, 2007 at 8:32 am
I'm thinking this is wrong...
SELECT * FROM IPGDB..SHPHST
WHERE SIDATE > '2007-10-16'
AND SIDATE <= '2007-10-17'
Should be...
SELECT * FROM IPGDB..SHPHST
WHERE SIDATE >= '2007-10-16'
AND SIDATE < '2007-10-17'
Other than that, your transaction is pretty...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 26, 2007 at 7:45 pm
Kenneth Wilhelmsson (10/26/2007)
SQL Server is very obedient and sorts exactly as asked to..
...if that wasn't exactly what one intended, is another matter..
The 'fault'...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 26, 2007 at 7:39 pm
How would you like to import 5 million rows in about a minute? Post, say, 100 rows of data as an attachment and I'll show you how to build...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 26, 2007 at 7:35 pm
Roger that...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 26, 2007 at 7:10 pm
bharani (10/23/2007)
ya, but my team want that to be an int value...
Your team is absolutely wrong... Peter Larson has a good viable solution... storing any date or time as other...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 26, 2007 at 5:38 pm
Heh... no matter how you swing it, this whole thing is RBAR... if it's for a GUI single row proc... no problem... if it even comes near a batch, big...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 26, 2007 at 5:32 pm
Heh... the only thing I might disagee with is you calling Celko "smart" 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 26, 2007 at 5:27 pm
Bob Bridges (10/24/2007)
You got me on the right track... the problem is in the "SET @col" statement. I had
SET @col = 'Part2.Part1'
What I didn't realize is that the "Part2"...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 26, 2007 at 5:25 pm
MrPoleCat,
Would you be kind enought to test this on your SQL Server 7? Thank you, Sir...
--===== If the test table already exists, drop it
IF...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 26, 2007 at 5:13 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 54,421 through 54,435 (of 59,098 total)