Viewing 15 posts - 56,071 through 56,085 (of 59,098 total)
Yes, and no... if you use a format file for repetative imports, the answer is yes... but the data in this example won't support your method or my method because the...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2007 at 1:28 pm
Then there's THAT
Works almost everytime...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2007 at 1:24 pm
If you use OSQL with the -h-1 option and the -o option, something like the following works very well...
USE Northwind
SET NOCOUNT ON
SELECT QUOTENAME('CustomerID','"')+','
+ QUOTENAME('CompanyName','"')+','
+...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2007 at 1:17 pm
My pleasure... however, Wayne is correct... his method not only inherently checks the row counts, it also checks the actual data...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2007 at 1:06 pm
Ack! A cursor? ![]()
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2007 at 1:01 pm
Heh... understood and no worries... you've just got my curiosity up especially on the performance thing...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2007 at 8:15 am
Sorry... missed the fact that you were still working on this to take variables... I'll take a crack at it over the weekend...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2007 at 8:00 am
Sorry... didn't read the whole thread... I pretty much repeated what David McFarland already posted.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2007 at 6:21 am
Agreed... BIGINT will certainly work... But consider a couple of things before you decide to use any numeric datatype for any "numbers" column such as credit card numbers, bank account numbers,...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2007 at 6:19 am
Gosh, you would think so... I guess I understand why some folks don't, though... some DBA's don't practice what I consider to be the cardinal rule of being a DBA...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2007 at 5:58 am
Once again, your ideas are extemely sound, but I see no code from you...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 21, 2007 at 11:38 pm
Start with OSQL -L
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 21, 2007 at 11:35 pm
I agree with Aaron and Remi... there is no need for any dynamic SQL here. Also, you must follow Aaron's suggestion for how to test for the presence of a...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 21, 2007 at 11:31 pm
Bond a DBA or whatever is necessary, but no matter what the circumstance, the DBA must be a trusted individual in order to protect the very security required by SOX......
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 21, 2007 at 11:27 pm
First of all... INT is NOT capable of storing a 16 digit number so just forget about that.
Serqiy's idea is great but you must take that one step further... every...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 21, 2007 at 11:22 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 56,071 through 56,085 (of 59,098 total)