October 17, 2010 at 10:50 am
GilaMonster (10/17/2010)
Lennie's back...
(After reading past posts)... Ohhh, that Lennie
May I suggest that everyone just ignores that? I don't think we need another flaming thread here.
Ignored
Wayne
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008
Author - SQL Server T-SQL Recipes
October 17, 2010 at 1:06 pm
Sorry, but I couldn't resist responding. We'll see how he takes my critizism (sp ?).
October 17, 2010 at 2:56 pm
Lynn Pettis (10/17/2010)
Sorry, but I couldn't resist responding. We'll see how he takes my critizism (sp ?).
Well, that's a very snsible thing to tell him. But...
I think the result may be amusing, and probably not constructive.
What's the betting he calls you all sorts of names and says the idea of having a stored procedure is an unwanted overhead?
Tom
October 17, 2010 at 3:23 pm
Tom.Thomson (10/17/2010)
Lynn Pettis (10/17/2010)
Sorry, but I couldn't resist responding. We'll see how he takes my critizism (sp ?).Well, that's a very snsible thing to tell him. But...
I think the result may be amusing, and probably not constructive.
What's the betting he calls you all sorts of names and says the idea of having a stored procedure is an unwanted overhead?
I'm more interested in what his sock puppets may say.
October 17, 2010 at 3:30 pm
Tom.Thomson (10/17/2010)
What's the betting he calls you all sorts of names
Yes
and says the idea of having a stored procedure is an unwanted overhead?
Don't think so. More likely, I think, to have a less rational response. This from prior experience on the last thread.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
October 17, 2010 at 4:12 pm
GilaMonster (10/17/2010)
Tom.Thomson (10/17/2010)
What's the betting he calls you all sorts of namesYes
and says the idea of having a stored procedure is an unwanted overhead?
Don't think so. More likely, I think, to have a less rational response. This from prior experience on the last thread.
If I were to bet on this, I'd have to agree with Gail.
Wayne
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008
Author - SQL Server T-SQL Recipes
October 17, 2010 at 4:27 pm
WayneS (10/17/2010)
GilaMonster (10/17/2010)
Tom.Thomson (10/17/2010)
What's the betting he calls you all sorts of namesYes
and says the idea of having a stored procedure is an unwanted overhead?
Don't think so. More likely, I think, to have a less rational response. This from prior experience on the last thread.
If I were to bet on this, I'd have to agree with Gail.
I actually agree with all of you, but I felt compelled to respond and I'm willing to see it through, at least initially. Nothing says I can't walk away, though we all know how hard that is for the Saint of SSC.
Let's all just hide and watch.
October 17, 2010 at 5:31 pm
What let down response Lennie gave. Makes walking away much easier.
October 17, 2010 at 6:10 pm
GilaMonster (10/17/2010)
Tom.Thomson (10/17/2010)
What's the betting he calls you all sorts of namesYes
and says the idea of having a stored procedure is an unwanted overhead?
Don't think so. More likely, I think, to have a less rational response. This from prior experience on the last thread.
You're probably right, I guess.
Tom
October 17, 2010 at 6:34 pm
Alvin Ramard (10/15/2010)
Grant Fritchey (10/15/2010)
GilaMonster (10/15/2010)
And just when I thought the situation at That Client couldn't get any worse....<headdesk><headdesk><headdesk><headdesk>
(No, I'm not going into details, it's a little too sensitive a topic for that. Just.... :crazy:)
Just remember, hitting the same spot over & over can be bad. Try <headwall><headwall> or <headsink><headsink> just to mix things up.
But seriously, sorry to hear that bad situation is spiralling. Good luck.
And if that doesn't work, try banging somebody else's head against the wall/desk/sink ....
Sorry to hear that too.
Based on what I've seen in this thread so far, don't even think of tryin <headbutt><headbutt><headbutt> 😀
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 17, 2010 at 6:37 pm
GSquared (10/15/2010)
CirquedeSQLeil (10/15/2010)
GSquared (10/15/2010)
Yesterday, whilst commuting, I was actually thinking about setting up a video camera on my dashboard, and blogging the "good parts".Then I realized it would contain at least as much self-incrimination as anything else, and decided not to....
Speaking of commuting - did you find a job?
Ayup! And my evil master plan for conquering the world by working for a small marketing company is going exactly as I have forseen it!! 🙂
Which company?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 17, 2010 at 6:40 pm
WayneS (10/16/2010)
GilaMonster (10/16/2010)
Swap? http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1005710-265-1.aspxMe: Run CheckDB and and post the full and unedited results
OP: I have used that command and it returned about 3000 line of error code. This is last lines. (Posts 7 lines)
Aw, come on Gail. You gotta tell the whole story...
After posting those last 7 lines the OP says
Then I used this commands:
ALTER DATABASE FAQ
SET single_user WITH ROLLBACK IMMEDIATE;
go
DBCC checkdb ('FAQ', repair_allow_data_loss);
go
Even with DBCC TIMEWARP, I don't believe there's enough hamster poo in the world to drive the flux capacitor well enough to fix that particular problem... especially since he probably won't make backups in the future either. 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 17, 2010 at 6:57 pm
WayneS (10/14/2010)
"Don't try this at home... we're professionals!"
Heh... I have the perfect SQL subject for that... Quirky Update. 😀
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 17, 2010 at 7:04 pm
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (10/14/2010)
The green value, if there is one, comes not from you getting ebooks, but from 1000s of people doing this. Less paper, less energy, less storage, not to mention less trucking, heating, cooling, etc. That being said, not sure this is the best way to remain green, especially as you have to charge it up.Doesn't bode well for lots of jobs, and I hope that some level of "bookstore" still remains in the future.
I wonder what the total carbon footprint of manufacturing such a device is? Add the carbon footprint of recycling it at end of life.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 17, 2010 at 8:56 pm
Jeff Moden (10/17/2010)
WayneS (10/14/2010)
"Don't try this at home... we're professionals!"Heh... I have the perfect SQL subject for that... Quirky Update. 😀
SOM!
Wayne
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008
Author - SQL Server T-SQL Recipes
Viewing 15 posts - 20,506 through 20,520 (of 66,712 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply