Viewing 15 posts - 56,566 through 56,580 (of 59,098 total)
You could put a trigger trigger on the table that counts the rows in the table... could be either an AFTER trigger that deletes what's been inserted once it hits...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 27, 2007 at 12:11 pm
no_return should actually be no_output and, in this case, it will be of NO_HELP... no_output is part of xp_cmdshell and it just means not to display any output it may...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 26, 2007 at 8:35 pm
>>Margalit- you may want to identify yourself as the Product Manager for DBMaestro.
It DID sound like a shameless plug... now I know why... almost as bad as spam but lower....
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 26, 2007 at 8:22 pm
Aw heck... let's continue the corruption to the max... give it an sp_ prefix and drop it into Master ![]()
![]()
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 26, 2007 at 8:10 pm
Are you sure it's not just ASCII?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 26, 2007 at 7:55 pm
Mostly, because it's just not allowed... read the following from Books Online...
The rules for the format of regular identifiers are dependent on the database compatibility level, which...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 24, 2007 at 1:31 pm
I think the point here is that it doesn't appear that they're teaching such basics anymore.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 24, 2007 at 7:22 am
Eyes must be strained a bit... just can't find that anywhere in your original post. ![]()
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 23, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Please tell me you didn't just publish the real login/password to your site...
![]()
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 23, 2007 at 6:01 am
I agree with Serqiy on this one... your code is better if you don't use a UDF here.
In SQL 2005, you can use GETDATE() in a UDF... you can also...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 23, 2007 at 5:54 am
Ok... let's say you do want an explicit transaction for that... where's the error check and rollback code that should go with it?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 22, 2007 at 1:28 pm
That's probably right in SQL Server 2000... dunno about 2005 with that nice new RowNum and PARTITION OVER statement.
I do gotta ask though, why on Earth are you declaring an...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 22, 2007 at 10:22 am
Hi there, Koji,
Got your private message and thought I'd post my reply here so that others can see it, as well...
Koji,
There's not much to a Triangular Join (least, not up front)......
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 21, 2007 at 11:18 pm
Please don't cross-post...![]()
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 19, 2007 at 10:24 pm
Please don't cross-post...![]()
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 19, 2007 at 10:23 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 56,566 through 56,580 (of 59,098 total)