Steve Jones - SSC Editor (10/15/2010)

---

I would have thought so, but if people entered data in a new system, you can't restore without losing that data. So you need to...

DR always has to be a priority for business IMO. At my last job, there was discussion as to whether we really "needed" a generator. After all, Power...

e3h4 (10/12/2010)

---

People often assume you need to use GUIDs for unique values across databases and for replication. However, there is an easy way to get around that using an...

preensheen (10/8/2010)

---

Chowdary Pulivarthi (10/8/2010)

---

Hi,

I have a job with 4 steps.

Step1 :

Step2:

Step3:

Step4:

If my step 3 is failed i need to send a mail and execute the step 4.

Could you please help...

You are in a new world in 2008. I would advise you to read up heavily on schemas in BOL. Basically the object is no longer "owned" by...

Chowdary Pulivarthi (10/8/2010)

---

Hi,

I have a job with 4 steps.

Step1 :

Step2:

Step3:

Step4:

If my step 3 is failed i need to send a mail and execute the step 4.

Could you please help me...

I certainly saw that when I upgraded from 2000 to 2005. There were a series of report queries that began to perform horribly in 05 that worked well in...

And more to the point, I know that this works because one time we had a production server shut down unexpectedly in the middle of the day. The Stop...

You sure about that? When I stop SQL Server, there is an event logged in the System Log in Event Viewer that is EventID 7035. It says that...

Have you tried using the "-n" parameter instead of the "-N" one?

Frankly this sounds like a potential fit for using application roles. The app role would have permissions and the NT account would not (but could still be tracked).

Not this early. Past experience doesn't lead me to worry TOO much, though testing it first is essential obviously.

You can apply SP2 without applying SP1 first; SP2 is cumulative.

The only way I have ever seen successful auditing on SELECTs was by forcing them through stored procedures, and the stored procedure always logged its running as the first step...

This is just wrong. I know of no requirement like that. Partitioning has nothing to do with referential integrity and it shouldn't even enter into the discussion.