July 18, 2013 at 4:38 am
dwain.c (7/17/2013)
Brandie Tarvin (7/17/2013)
WHOO HOO!Not only did I just teach myself how to use MERGE (never had time or reason), but I managed to use it correctly with a Cross Applied Tally table and an INNER JOIN inside the USING clause.
<SnoopyDance>
And it only took me 30 minutes to figure it all out.
One thing to take care with when using MERGE though: A Hazard of Using the SQL Merge Statement[/url]
It's not a bug it's a feature, but does have the potential to cause you grief if you don't know about it.
Thanks for the link. I'll go take a gander.
July 18, 2013 at 8:42 am
george sibbald (7/17/2013)
Stefan Krzywicki (7/17/2013)
I've been having my own little annoyance with something SQL Server related lately. If you use SSIS to create text files and save it from one server to another, into SQL Server, the text qualifier changes from <none> to _x003C_none_x003E_ in every connection manager that affects a text file. To fix it I have to open the SSIS package on the local machine, delete the text qualifier and save it again. It isn't a huge deal, but it is annoying and I have to remember every time I deploy a new SSIS package from Dev to Prod that creates a text file and I don't do that very often.I remember why.
What appears to happen is that when a .dtsx is copied to a new server then the text qualifiers for flat file connections can become corrupted. Where no text qualifier is defined, then <none> is shown in the properties, but this can get converted to _x003C_none_x003E_ (i.e. <none> with the < and > converted to their unicode values). So when SSIS exports the CSV file, it surrounds every field with _x003C_none_x003E_.
This is the workaround -
There are 2 ways to edit the TextQualifier property of a flat file connection. One is to use an edit box and the other is to directly edit the property in the Property explorer. If you use the edit box and blank out the Text Qualifier then it actually sets the property to <none> (whether you want it to or not). If however you blank out the TextQualifier property directly in the Property explorer then it stays as blank.
HTH
Thanks, I'll try to keep that in mind for next time. Whenever that is. : -)
--------------------------------------
When you encounter a problem, if the solution isn't readily evident go back to the start and check your assumptions.
--------------------------------------
It’s unpleasantly like being drunk.
What’s so unpleasant about being drunk?
You ask a glass of water. -- Douglas Adams
July 18, 2013 at 9:06 am
Jeff Moden (7/17/2013)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/17/2013)
Koen Verbeeck (7/17/2013)
Jeff Moden (7/16/2013)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/16/2013)
Arrgggg, some days I hate software.BWAAA-HAAA!!!! You mean like the stuff that generates the SSC News Letter? :sick::-D:-P
Touché 😀
Yeah, that's been annoying lately. An argument is underway
Well at least they didn't incorporate a "Ribbon Bar". 😛
That's what the argument is about... :w00t:
Wayne
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008
Author - SQL Server T-SQL Recipes
July 18, 2013 at 9:37 am
WayneS (7/18/2013)
Jeff Moden (7/17/2013)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/17/2013)
Koen Verbeeck (7/17/2013)
Jeff Moden (7/16/2013)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/16/2013)
Arrgggg, some days I hate software.BWAAA-HAAA!!!! You mean like the stuff that generates the SSC News Letter? :sick::-D:-P
Touché 😀
Yeah, that's been annoying lately. An argument is underway
Well at least they didn't incorporate a "Ribbon Bar". 😛
That's what the argument is about... :w00t:
The newsletter is already partway to a ribbon bar, all of the content is in a completely different location which makes it really difficult to find any part. The only piece left would be to further obfuscate it by hiding the items behind the obscure buttons of a ribbon bar. This will ensure that we all have to first use google to figure out where the most frequently used options have been moved.
_______________________________________________________________
Need help? Help us help you.
Read the article at http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/ for best practices on asking questions.
Need to split a string? Try Jeff Modens splitter http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Tally+Table/72993/.
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 1 – Converting Rows to Columns - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/T-SQL/63681/
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 2 - Dynamic Cross Tabs - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Crosstab/65048/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 1) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69953/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 2) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69954/
July 18, 2013 at 11:19 am
L' Eomot Inversé (7/17/2013)
why should they need a ribbon bar when they know how to waste far more screen space without having one?
Careful, I like the ribbons.
you just might get one for the forums.
July 18, 2013 at 12:01 pm
dwain.c (7/17/2013)
Brandie Tarvin (7/17/2013)
WHOO HOO!Not only did I just teach myself how to use MERGE (never had time or reason), but I managed to use it correctly with a Cross Applied Tally table and an INNER JOIN inside the USING clause.
<SnoopyDance>
And it only took me 30 minutes to figure it all out.
One thing to take care with when using MERGE though: A Hazard of Using the SQL Merge Statement[/url]
It's not a bug it's a feature, but does have the potential to cause you grief if you don't know about it.
Okay. Read the article. Reread it again. I understand the conclusion, but the content was a little iffy. There are certain assumptions made about the reader understanding what the writer was doing without setting up a plain English business case. So I'm still confused on why the author decided to deliberate throw in a DELETE on the NOT MATCHED BY SOURCE bit and then act surprised when it worked as advertised.
Thanks for the link, though.
July 18, 2013 at 2:44 pm
Is the email queue backed up again? I haven't received notifications all day today. Anybody else?
_______________________________________________________________
Need help? Help us help you.
Read the article at http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/ for best practices on asking questions.
Need to split a string? Try Jeff Modens splitter http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Tally+Table/72993/.
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 1 – Converting Rows to Columns - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/T-SQL/63681/
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 2 - Dynamic Cross Tabs - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Crosstab/65048/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 1) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69953/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 2) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69954/
July 18, 2013 at 3:34 pm
Sean Lange (7/18/2013)
Is the email queue backed up again? I haven't received notifications all day today. Anybody else?
me neither
---------------------------------------------------------------------
July 18, 2013 at 7:16 pm
Brandie Tarvin (7/18/2013)
dwain.c (7/17/2013)
Brandie Tarvin (7/17/2013)
WHOO HOO!Not only did I just teach myself how to use MERGE (never had time or reason), but I managed to use it correctly with a Cross Applied Tally table and an INNER JOIN inside the USING clause.
<SnoopyDance>
And it only took me 30 minutes to figure it all out.
One thing to take care with when using MERGE though: A Hazard of Using the SQL Merge Statement[/url]
It's not a bug it's a feature, but does have the potential to cause you grief if you don't know about it.
Okay. Read the article. Reread it again. I understand the conclusion, but the content was a little iffy. There are certain assumptions made about the reader understanding what the writer was doing without setting up a plain English business case. So I'm still confused on why the author decided to deliberate throw in a DELETE on the NOT MATCHED BY SOURCE bit and then act surprised when it worked as advertised.
Thanks for the link, though.
I agree. That author's an amateur. But it was fun to write.
My thought question: Have you ever been told that your query runs too fast?
My advice:
INDEXing a poor-performing query is like putting sugar on cat food. Yeah, it probably tastes better but are you sure you want to eat it?
The path of least resistance can be a slippery slope. Take care that fixing your fixes of fixes doesn't snowball and end up costing you more than fixing the root cause would have in the first place.
Need to UNPIVOT? Why not CROSS APPLY VALUES instead?[/url]
Since random numbers are too important to be left to chance, let's generate some![/url]
Learn to understand recursive CTEs by example.[/url]
[url url=http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/St
July 19, 2013 at 12:26 am
dwain.c (7/18/2013)
Brandie Tarvin (7/18/2013)
dwain.c (7/17/2013)
Brandie Tarvin (7/17/2013)
WHOO HOO!Not only did I just teach myself how to use MERGE (never had time or reason), but I managed to use it correctly with a Cross Applied Tally table and an INNER JOIN inside the USING clause.
<SnoopyDance>
And it only took me 30 minutes to figure it all out.
One thing to take care with when using MERGE though: A Hazard of Using the SQL Merge Statement[/url]
It's not a bug it's a feature, but does have the potential to cause you grief if you don't know about it.
Okay. Read the article. Reread it again. I understand the conclusion, but the content was a little iffy. There are certain assumptions made about the reader understanding what the writer was doing without setting up a plain English business case. So I'm still confused on why the author decided to deliberate throw in a DELETE on the NOT MATCHED BY SOURCE bit and then act surprised when it worked as advertised.
Thanks for the link, though.
I agree. That author's an amateur. But it was fun to write.
Ouch. 😉 😀
Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP
July 19, 2013 at 5:06 am
dwain.c (7/18/2013)
Brandie Tarvin (7/18/2013)
dwain.c (7/17/2013)
Brandie Tarvin (7/17/2013)
WHOO HOO!Not only did I just teach myself how to use MERGE (never had time or reason), but I managed to use it correctly with a Cross Applied Tally table and an INNER JOIN inside the USING clause.
<SnoopyDance>
And it only took me 30 minutes to figure it all out.
One thing to take care with when using MERGE though: A Hazard of Using the SQL Merge Statement[/url]
It's not a bug it's a feature, but does have the potential to cause you grief if you don't know about it.
Okay. Read the article. Reread it again. I understand the conclusion, but the content was a little iffy. There are certain assumptions made about the reader understanding what the writer was doing without setting up a plain English business case. So I'm still confused on why the author decided to deliberate throw in a DELETE on the NOT MATCHED BY SOURCE bit and then act surprised when it worked as advertised.
Thanks for the link, though.
I agree. That author's an amateur. But it was fun to write.
:blush: Did not read the author's name when I read the article. Sorry. Didn't realize it was you.
July 19, 2013 at 6:16 am
Brandie Tarvin (7/19/2013)
dwain.c (7/18/2013)
Brandie Tarvin (7/18/2013)
dwain.c (7/17/2013)
Brandie Tarvin (7/17/2013)
WHOO HOO!Not only did I just teach myself how to use MERGE (never had time or reason), but I managed to use it correctly with a Cross Applied Tally table and an INNER JOIN inside the USING clause.
<SnoopyDance>
And it only took me 30 minutes to figure it all out.
One thing to take care with when using MERGE though: A Hazard of Using the SQL Merge Statement[/url]
It's not a bug it's a feature, but does have the potential to cause you grief if you don't know about it.
Okay. Read the article. Reread it again. I understand the conclusion, but the content was a little iffy. There are certain assumptions made about the reader understanding what the writer was doing without setting up a plain English business case. So I'm still confused on why the author decided to deliberate throw in a DELETE on the NOT MATCHED BY SOURCE bit and then act surprised when it worked as advertised.
Thanks for the link, though.
I agree. That author's an amateur. But it was fun to write.
:blush: Did not read the author's name when I read the article. Sorry. Didn't realize it was you.
I had the same thoughts, but made the connection of who the author was.
Good constructive comment, outline a business case to set up the article better.
July 19, 2013 at 8:05 am
I was doing some research this morning and got sucked down a rabbit hole (it happens) and landed on a series of sites complaining about Stack Overflow and Stack Exchange. This one, mainly the comments, really struck me:http://sergworks.wordpress.com/2012/09/26/why-stackoverflow-sucks/
I think we were heading down that path a little, but it seems like we self-corrected. Just wanted to say thanks to all the Threadizens for not turning us into something bad.
PS: I even did a series of searches in Gingle for "'sql server central' sucks" and variations on that theme and just couldn't find anything too bad. Either we're invisible (unlikely) or we done good. Pat yourselves on the back.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
July 19, 2013 at 8:23 am
Grant Fritchey (7/19/2013)
I was doing some research this morning and got sucked down a rabbit hole (it happens) and landed on a series of sites complaining about Stack Overflow and Stack Exchange. This one, mainly the comments, really struck me:http://sergworks.wordpress.com/2012/09/26/why-stackoverflow-sucks/I think we were heading down that path a little, but it seems like we self-corrected. Just wanted to say thanks to all the Threadizens for not turning us into something bad.
PS: I even did a series of searches in Gingle for "'sql server central' sucks" and variations on that theme and just couldn't find anything too bad. Either we're invisible (unlikely) or we done good. Pat yourselves on the back.
We have from time to time started heading in a bad direction. The good news is that there always seems to be a few people around here who remind us or nudge us back to the "good side". I am pretty sure that most of the "regulars" around here have been on both sides of that nudging once or twice.
I think that by not having those idiotic reputation points we have served ourselves and our community well in the long run. To be honest, a down vote is quite rude. Many times it is somebody who is honestly trying to help but posts a less then optimal solution. At least around here we tend to educate not only the OP but also the responder in those cases. The lack of reputation points I think eliminates some of the BS favorites type of crap. We can stick to what is important, the question and not stroking our egos.
_______________________________________________________________
Need help? Help us help you.
Read the article at http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/ for best practices on asking questions.
Need to split a string? Try Jeff Modens splitter http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Tally+Table/72993/.
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 1 – Converting Rows to Columns - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/T-SQL/63681/
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 2 - Dynamic Cross Tabs - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Crosstab/65048/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 1) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69953/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 2) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69954/
July 19, 2013 at 8:46 am
Sean Lange (7/19/2013)
We have from time to time started heading in a bad direction. The good news is that there always seems to be a few people around here who remind us or nudge us back to the "good side". I am pretty sure that most of the "regulars" around here have been on both sides of that nudging once or twice.I think that by not having those idiotic reputation points we have served ourselves and our community well in the long run. To be honest, a down vote is quite rude. Many times it is somebody who is honestly trying to help but posts a less then optimal solution. At least around here we tend to educate not only the OP but also the responder in those cases. The lack of reputation points I think eliminates some of the BS favorites type of crap. We can stick to what is important, the question and not stroking our egos.
What's that?
I can't hear you since you have less than 10,000 points.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
Viewing 15 posts - 40,606 through 40,620 (of 66,712 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply