External Article

One use case for NOT using schema prefixes

I’ve long been a huge advocate for always referencing objects with a schema prefix in SQL Server.

In spite of what may be a controversial title to many of my regular blog readers, I don’t really want you to stop that practice in most of your T-SQL code, because the schema prefix is important and useful most of the time. At Stack Overflow, though, there is a very specific pattern we use where not specifying the schema is beneficial.

SQLServerCentral Editorial

The Impact of Small Changes

A year ago, I started a monthly blogging event for the PostgreSQL community, inspired by T-SQL Tuesdays. I decided to call it PGSQL Phriday. (Time will tell if my insistence on trying to use a literation was a good idea or not.) Like the event for the SQL Server community, we ask someone to be […]

Blogs

Installing Old Versions of PowerShell Modules with Their Dependencies

By

I don’t recall where this came up (probably in SQLSlack), but I had a...

In Memory of Andrew Clarke, AKA Phil Factor

By

One of the parts of getting older that really sucks is I seem to...

Leading Through the Noise: Harnessing Data in the Age of Digital Overload

By

The New Leadership Frontier In today’s digital landscape, leaders are no longer just visionaries....

Read the latest Blogs

Forums

taking the rcsi dive

By stan

Hi, we put together an extract that runs every 15 minutes against what i...

Parameter Sensitive Plan Optimization in SQL Server 2022

By Deepam Ghosh

Comments posted to this topic are about the item Parameter Sensitive Plan Optimization in...

Minimum Change Tracking Retention

By Steve Jones - SSC Editor

Comments posted to this topic are about the item Minimum Change Tracking Retention

Visit the forum

Question of the Day

Minimum Change Tracking Retention

If I am running this code:

ALTER DATABASE AdventureWorks2017 SET CHANGE_TRACKING = ON (CHANGE_RETENTION=xxx);
What is the minimum amount of time I can set?

See possible answers