Easy...

1.  Any decimal dollar amount greater than x.xx5, regardless of the number of decimal places, will be rounded up to the penny.

2.  Any decimal dollar amount less than x.xx5, regardless...

Dang... Your name is even posted right under your handle, too!  I missed that... sorry, Gail.

GM beat me to it but using his test, I came up with the same correct results all 3 times...

SortOrder,Letter

0,e

0,b

1,a

1,f

1,c

2,d

2,g

Ryan, Yep, I tried it and you are correct (I forgot...

As the article warns, this method makes use of a correlated subquery that forms a triangular join which is half a cross join.  It will crush any hopes of performance...

You do not need to enable full text features to use SOUNDEX or DIFFERENCE...

DECLARE @Str1 VARCHAR(100)

DECLARE @Str2 VARCHAR(100)

SET @Str1 = '129 Green Ave'

SET @Str2 = 'Green...

If tl.Date is a DateTime column to begin with, you don't need to do any of that.... the Order By tl.Date will work correctly even though you've Cast it in...

I'm still curious... why did you want to join two tables that have nothing in common to join on?

That's what I thought... thanks for the feedback, Trigger.

Just a reminder, folks... xp_CmdShell requires SA privs or a proxy login that has SA privs.

Pat,

Basically, any legal expression may be used so long as it does not refer to another table.  Cast and Case may be used.  SELECT may not because it's a "clause"...

Nope... it's not... SET ls_action=0 will fail in the absence of other code.  You either have to declare ls_action as variable (don't forget to add the @ sign) or you have...

Daniel,

The other thing you may not be aware of is that if you update ANY column in the table that has a timestamp column, the TimeStamp will change.  I think...

Ok, thanks... you sure you wanted the duplication in the #QueryTable?  Could get pretty nasty if you have lots of rows...

Steve and Ken...

Yup, I knew that... I just thought that since Trigger recommended it as a T_SQL command, there might be some neat trick he was using to use it...

Yup, your method works just fine (but what a pain with all of those indexes).  And, deleting the "dupes" probably wouldn't be any faster because of the indexes.

And, to answer...