Viewing 15 posts - 37,576 through 37,590 (of 39,720 total)
count(*) usually pulls the count from sysindexes. There were problems with this being accurate in SQL 65 (possible 70). I think in 2000, this is accurate.
Steve Jones
June 24, 2002 at 9:55 am
Perhaps some data item is causing QA to drop the connection. Is this a specific table or all tables/servers? Is it the same amount of rows each time?
Steve Jones
June 24, 2002 at 9:53 am
Perhaps some data item is causing QA to drop the connection. Is this a specific table or all tables/servers? Is it the same amount of rows each time?
Steve Jones
June 24, 2002 at 9:53 am
If the log file doesn't shrink (after following both posts above), there is a script in the library here that will help.
Steve Jones
June 24, 2002 at 9:42 am
Can you connect via isql? Or Query Analyzer?
EM uses more than one connection and if you are single user mode, you cannot use this.
Steve Jones
June 24, 2002 at 9:40 am
June 24, 2002 at 9:33 am
And please follow up here. I (and others) are curious to find out what is happening.
Steve Jones
June 24, 2002 at 9:31 am
I agree a log would be the outage window, but keep in mind if you are out for longer than the window for a transaction log, you will need to...
June 24, 2002 at 9:28 am
Clustered index stores the data in the order of the index (physically). Nice for columns used in range queries (like dates). Only one per table as you can only store...
June 21, 2002 at 12:52 pm
June 21, 2002 at 10:41 am
Not easy. You'd have to build a SQL join for each column you need. USually this is done with dynamic SQL as
select emp.emp-code, b.time as b.date, c.time as c.date
...
June 21, 2002 at 10:29 am
You can in T-SQL, but it's an ugly mail message you have to build. I too wish MS had included this.
Send it to sqlwish@microsoft.com ![]()
Steve Jones
June 21, 2002 at 10:22 am
When you use Windows Auth, the windows credentials (essentially a token) are passed to SQL Server, which then verifies this with a DC.
First, it's a security risk across the Internet...
June 21, 2002 at 10:19 am
Antares is correct. When you execute certain stored procedures (system ones) permissions are rechecked for security purposes. I think the solution proposed above is a great one.
Steve Jones
June 21, 2002 at 10:13 am
If it doesn't have to be realtime, then I usually insert the data into a table and have a job come create those users every minute.
I had a similar issue...
June 21, 2002 at 9:53 am
Viewing 15 posts - 37,576 through 37,590 (of 39,720 total)