Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 81 total)

  • Reply To: You're not really that good at SQL Server

    Steve Jones - SSC Editor wrote:

    Wow, that's a crazy attitude to me, but I don't know the situation.There are valid reasons sometimes why not to change a process.

    Certainly building something very complex that few...

    • This reply was modified 2 years, 3 months ago by  petitpere.
    • This reply was modified 2 years, 3 months ago by  petitpere.
    • This reply was modified 2 years, 3 months ago by  petitpere.
  • Reply To: You're not really that good at SQL Server

    brennang wrote:

    ... One way to resolve it is through leading by example and better management.

    YES, but amongst the managers ...

    "There are a number of things people lack that lead to...

  • Reply To: You're not really that good at SQL Server

    I agree on most of the points and disagree on some others. Huh that's why debates are interesting.

    Often, when I speak about SQL with colleagues, they all pretend "Yes, I...

  • RE: Choosing a Career

    Well, to be honest I did not expect to be the first one to reply after 3 days. 😉

    Let me first clarify who I am. I graduated from...

  • RE: SQL versus program

    patrickmcginnis59 10839 - Monday, October 30, 2017 10:56 AM

    Jeff Moden - Monday, October 30, 2017 10:40 AM

  • RE: SQL versus program

    Ed Wagner - Sunday, October 29, 2017 5:52 PM

    I've seen the security advantages of using parameters fed into stored procedures, so I...

  • RE: SQL versus program

    Thanks to all of you for your answers ...
    I'm sorry I can't reply currently because of closing issues running wrong!

  • RE: SQL versus program

    Thanks Jeff for sharing your thoughts with me.

    I personnally think that SQL queries scares those who are familiar with algorythmic programming unlike set-based programming.

    Did you...

  • RE: SQL versus program

    Thanks Thom for your answer; security is the first argument; using "parametrised SQL" could be less secure than storing this process in SPs. I did not think of it. :)

  • RE: missing concatenated star

    GOT IT !

    If I run  following query, it's all fine ...

    select

  • RE: missing concatenated star

    Thanks Luis!
    I did not know/remember about the ASCII function.
    The result is
    3802 Berlin 105
    3802 Berlin 110
    26880 Berlin 66
    26880 Berlin 101
    26880 Berlin 114
    26880 Berlin 108
    26880 Berlin 105
    26880 Berlin 110
    26880 Berlin 0
    40921 Berlin 66
    40921 Berlin 101
    40921 Berlin 114
    40921 Berlin 108
    Now I need to find...

  • RE: Automating linear regressions

    thanks alastair.beveridge ... I'll have a look at this ... it will not be as easy to implement as I initially thought of, but the power behind can be very...

  • RE: Count(*) output blank but required Zero

    Sergiy - Monday, February 27, 2017 4:05 AM

    rot-717018 - Monday, February 27, 2017 1:40 AM

  • RE: Count(*) output blank but required Zero

    A field in your SELECT returns a NULL and thus the entire concatenated line is NULL.
    Replacing "cast(Count(Number of Items))" by "cast(COALESCE(Count(Number of Items), 0) as varchar)" would do the trick...

  • RE: Automating linear regressions

    Vielen Dank HanShi for sharing your script.
    At first sight I can't see any matrix inversion in it (that's in fact the function I need most in matrix calculations ;-)...

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 81 total)