Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 455 total)

  • RE: The Sequence Object in SQL Server 2012

    okbangas (6/4/2012)

    sknox (6/4/2012)

    danl-971512 (6/4/2012)

    It also makes it easier to "blow the lid" off of big-int based sequences especially if a single sequence is used in large or huge tables.

    And IDENTITY...

    June 4, 2012 at 5:52 pm

    #1496831

  • RE: The Sequence Object in SQL Server 2012

    danl-971512 (6/4/2012)

    It also makes it easier to "blow the lid" off of big-int based sequences especially if a single sequence is used in large or huge tables.

    And IDENTITY is better...

    June 4, 2012 at 7:53 am

    #1496486

  • RE: Transactions 3

    John Mitchell-245523 (5/30/2012)

    Hugo Kornelis (5/30/2012)

    John Mitchell-245523 (5/30/2012)

    I must admit I'm surprised that having SET XACT_ABORT OFF is the default.

    I am not. I prefer to be able to handle my errors...

    May 30, 2012 at 1:03 pm

    #1494847

  • RE: Master Keys

    There is no direct reference in BoL, but there are plenty of indirect references. From http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms174382.aspx for example:

    The database master key is a symmetric key used to protect the private...

    May 25, 2012 at 7:57 am

    #1493180

  • RE: Transactions 2

    Nakul Vachhrajani (5/22/2012)

    Good question with a couple of learning points.

    1. By default SQL does not abort the entire transaction if it encounters a statment-level failure. In this case, the primary...

    May 23, 2012 at 8:00 am

    #1491779

  • RE: Select Statement

    archie flockhart (5/22/2012)

    Yes, I can see a reason for having an 'integer division' operation. That doesn't mean it needed to be the default behaviour whenever two integers are divided.

    And it...

    May 22, 2012 at 8:49 am

    #1491141

  • RE: DBCC CHECKDB

    I take issue with this option:

    DBCC CHECKDB can repair corruption if you specify the REPAIR_ALLOW_DATA_LOSS option.

    This is not always true (it depends on exactly where the corruption is), and when...

    May 17, 2012 at 7:33 am

    #1489004

  • RE: SELECT * usage

    L' Eomot Inversé (5/10/2012)

    Hugo Kornelis (5/10/2012)

    I have to disagree with you, Tom.

    Sure, the wording could have been better. I'll immediately agree to that.

    But the question clearly asks: "When does a...

    May 10, 2012 at 8:34 am

    #1485739

  • RE: View 7

    bitbucket-25253 (5/8/2012)

    ...unfortunately as of this point in time I have an additional 8 QOD scheduled...

    FTFY 😀

    May 8, 2012 at 6:40 pm

    #1484832

  • RE: View 7

    bitbucket-25253 (5/8/2012)

    Hugo Kornelis (5/8/2012)

    dogramone (5/8/2012)

    Wow, did a google search and there was no mention in any of the four posts I checked about the count_big so I got it wrong.

    You...

    May 8, 2012 at 11:45 am

    #1484683

  • RE: View 7

    Hugo Kornelis (5/8/2012)

    dogramone (5/8/2012)

    Wow, did a google search and there was no mention in any of the four posts I checked about the count_big so I got it wrong.

    You would...

    May 8, 2012 at 7:43 am

    #1484514

  • RE: What is the logical Processing order of select statement

    Hugo Kornelis (5/3/2012)

    What bothers me (about the documentation referenced, not about this question) is the relative order of ON and JOIN - how can the ON be processed without first...

    May 3, 2012 at 10:18 am

    #1483182

  • RE: Sequences III

    mtassin (5/1/2012)

    sknox (5/1/2012)

    The problem comes in when you specify some values but leave others at default, as in this scenario, or when you haven't used a feature for a while,...

    May 1, 2012 at 2:06 pm

    #1482092

  • RE: Sequences III

    mtassin (5/1/2012)

    marlon.seton (5/1/2012)

    I think this question indicates that using default values with a new item like CREATE SEQUENCE isn't a great idea. I, for one, will be defining everything...

    May 1, 2012 at 11:39 am

    #1481966

  • RE: Demystifying the use of CASE in an ORDER BY statement

    ben.kimball (4/26/2012)

    Seems a good example of how tired and overloaded SQL syntax has become.

    There's no overloading here. The only issue is with people assuming that CASE is overloaded when it...

    April 26, 2012 at 8:32 am

    #1479788

Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 455 total)