February 18, 2006 at 9:48 am
Comments posted to this topic are about the content posted at http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/bBaliner/sql2000tosql2005wherehavealltheoldfeaturesgone.asp
March 16, 2006 at 4:39 am
Never mind the features, why is SQL Management Studio so pathetically slow!
Even if you put the -nosplash switch on the SQLWB.EXE it takes an age to load.
There are bits I like, or there would be if I could get to them before the next ice age.
How the hell do you show the contents of a system stored procedure? I know sp_helptext but there MUST be a better way than that!
March 16, 2006 at 5:07 am
It is a great surpise to see that in sql2k5 we have lost the fucntionality to script a set of objects based on the settings i want. In sql2k, I can select a few objects (based on name, owner, created data or even randomly) and create the script. then i will be presented with the option of what to script (whether to have drop and create, script indexes, permissions etc) It is no more there.
Cheers,
Prithiviraj Kulasingham
http://preethiviraj.blogspot.com/
March 16, 2006 at 5:22 am
Some other problems using SSMS with a SQL 2000 instance:
The first two are apparently fixed in SP1, but there doesn't seem to be any indication of when we can expect to see it. The only current workaround is to re-install the SQL 2000 tools.
To work around the third problem, you can use the sp_helprotect procedure. However, this doesn't provide any simple way to see the list of objects which a user doesn't have access to.
March 16, 2006 at 6:05 am
Great article. I'm glad that I am not the only one who is missing these features. I especially miss the ability to DTS objects, such as SPs, from one db to another. That feature is now completely gone in SSIS! I don't see any reason why MS should not add it back in sp1.
Please MS, give us an easy way to script or copy stored procedures because some organizations rely on low tech admins to perform such tasks. It used to be available in the SQL 2000 DTS wizard and was called "Copy Objects and Data Between Servers" but now that functionality is completely gone in SSIS. It supposedly can still be done by creating a SSIS project in Visual Studio but that is too much for your average admin.
You're right, I think Advil's stock is going to go up as a direct result of this.
March 16, 2006 at 6:06 am
This one is pretty minor, but since the thread is managing SQL2K with SQL2005 tools...
When you look at legacy maintenance plan history, SQL2005 cannot sort the history records by date. It implies that it can because clicking on the End Date heading changes the display, but the date is sorted as text! Consequently, 10 March is after 1 March but BEFORE 2 March. Hey Microsoft, this makes sense because...?
------------
Buy the ticket, take the ride. -- Hunter S. Thompson
March 16, 2006 at 7:03 am
I would like to emphasis that SQL 2005 is another product versus just another version of SQL 2000. On the surface it may seem some of the features have disappeared in the product, but in actuality, it provides the DBAs with more flexibility. For instance, there is an extended stored procedure facility that allows DBAs to write his own sprocs that would enhance the current xp_fixeddrives routine currently provided by today's version of SQL. SQL 2005 also has the additional benefit of allowing the programmer or DBA wrote routines using VB.NET or C#.
In case to replace xp_fixeddrives just use scripting runtime library class Drive, which has property FreeSpace.
March 16, 2006 at 7:21 am
Some good new features, some missing old friends...what can you do. Do register your comments with MS and maybe somethings will be restored.
You will be upgraded. Resistance is futile. (Bill Gates)
March 16, 2006 at 7:22 am
How the hell do you show the contents of a system stored procedure? I know sp_helptext but there MUST be a better way than that!
SELECT OBJECT_DEFINITION (OBJECT_ID ('sys.sp_help') )
I suffered this one too
Cheers,
* Noel
March 16, 2006 at 7:39 am
Alex
I agreed with you. SQL Server 2005 is another product. I feel liked I have to learn SQL Server all over again.
March 16, 2006 at 7:40 am
"improve they're typing skills"
Not to nitpick, but that's a pretty funny clause to have a typo in.
March 16, 2006 at 8:06 am
Apparently, the first (and only) CTP of SQL 2005 SP1 has just been posted:
March 16, 2006 at 8:25 am
> Never mind the features, why is SQL Management Studio so pathetically slow!
> Even if you put the -nosplash switch on the SQLWB.EXE it takes an age to load.
Is it just loading you find is slow? I've found actual interaction with database to be faster, in particular things like right clicking on a server to select connect from the context menu - in enterprise manager you would be waiting quite a few seconds beofore the context menu appeared (presumably it was interrogating the server??!?), but in SSMS the menu is there straight away. Other operations seem to be as fast or faster.
> How the hell do you show the contents of a system stored procedure?
Am I missing something? Don't you just locate it under the system stored procedures subfolder of stored procedures, and right click on it and select Modify? Bit of a misnomer if all you want to do is look at it, but it still has the same effect?
Does anyone know how to add a column to a table in a merge publication? You used to bring up the properties of the publication, go to filter columns, find the table and click the add column button, but filter columns seems to have disappeared. Can obviously do it via sp_repladdcolumn, but it would be nice to have the option to do it via the GUI as well.
March 16, 2006 at 9:55 am
Just to nitpick a bit (it was a nice article), but last I heard the systables are being depricated, as well, in favor of the system views. As such you would want to do away with the calls to sysobjects:
SELECT name FROM sysobjects
should be
SELECT name FROM sys.objects
and
Select crdate as DateCreated
From dbo.sysobjects
should be
Select create_date as DateCreated
From sys.objects
March 16, 2006 at 10:03 am
Alex, I certainly agree that SQL 2005 is a new product, and a shift in paradigm. I even agree, at the risk of being strangled by other dbas, with doing away with some of the old commands and features that arn't terribly useful. I guess what I was trying to get at is: why take away something that's useful, and not replace it with anything? Like bookmark, for example... But that's another story
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 39 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply