June 22, 2016 at 9:24 am
Brandie Tarvin (6/22/2016)
Beatrix Kiddo (6/22/2016)
I'm f@*king terrified.
Me too, and ashamed of the xenophobes.
Back to SQL Server, I work for a company that has a lot of trading systems. We are expecting meltdown tomorrow & Friday :-D.
Heh. The SO works for Deutsche Bank. Well, he does today. Next week he has a new job, tomorrow & Friday are vacation days. So he gets to miss that meltdown. I've heard (from other sources) comments about change freezes and such at all major banks and trading institutions to insure that said meltdown doesn't get worse by code put into Production by some foolish, aspiring developer.
Which is very very wise IMHO.
Contract jobs are scarce over here right now, and there's one very good reason right there ^^.
For fast, accurate and documented assistance in answering your questions, please read this article.
Understanding and using APPLY, (I) and (II) Paul White
Hidden RBAR: Triangular Joins / The "Numbers" or "Tally" Table: What it is and how it replaces a loop Jeff Moden
June 22, 2016 at 10:34 am
ChrisM@Work (6/22/2016)
I've not seen a single argument from the Leave campaign that would convince me that life afterwards will be better. They've spouted torrents of rubbish about negotiating better trade deals on our own, fixing the (debatable) immigration issues and taking back sovereignty without once saying how they will do it. That, to me is just too big a risk to take with my country. Some of the material used in their campaign has been exaggerated, some of it mis-leading, some of it wrong and some of it outright lies. All I've heard from leave is incoherent rambling with occasional shouts of 'immigration', 'control' and 'millions of pounds' when peoples' attention has waned. The Remain campaign has been more measured but I'll admit they've had their moments.....
Both sides are guilty of bombarding us with the most appalling BS, so much so that it's the one hard fact that many folk will take home with them - the politicians are lying through their teeth. Didn't we always suspect that this was the case? Now there isn't any doubt.
Can't disagree with any of that. Both sides are spouting BS, the leave campaign is spouting nothing else and the remain campaign very little else.
Unfortuntely the "leave" campaign has the more charismatic figures; in particular it has Boris Johnson (who is campaigning for leave despite having clearly stated that he believed Britain would be better off in than out - presumably campaigning for leave in the hope of unseating Cameron and inheriting the conservative party leadership).
I'm certainly voting for "remain". I would hate to see Britain leave the EU.
It would have some nasty effects on the Union - what happens is Britain as a whole votes "leave" and Scotland votes "stay"? That would trigger an immediate demand from the SNP for a new referendum on independence. What happens when Britain as a whole votes "leave" and Northern Island votes "stay"? Is EU membership important to the Northern Ireland peace? Perhaps even if Britain as a whole votes leave and Northern Ireland vote "leave" by a small margin the changes in border rules between NIreland and RoIreland could trigger a new set of "troubles". Why is neither side saying anything about this? (Perhaps because neither the leavers nor the stayers want to boost the importance of the SNP or of Sinn Fein).
One particular piece of dishonesty by the leave cmpaign would be enough on its own to make me vote remain. I would have voted remain anyway without it, because I believe that remaining will deliver a better future both to the British nation and to the rest of Europe, but I think it's worth describing this disgusting behaviour:
One of the nastiest things about the leave campaign is their insistence that leaving the EU will enable Britain to ignore the ECtHR. Well, the ECHR and teh attached court were formed over the period 1950 to 1953 (1953 is the date or the convention coming into effect) so they antedate the EU by a very long time, and the Council of Europe (which created the ECHR and its court) dates from the ratification of the Treaty of London on 5 May 1949. So there's rather a lot or renogotiation of treaties that have nothing at all to do with the EU required there, and it has no connection whatever with whether we stay in or leave the EU. Interestingly, when the Russian parliament asked the Rusian Constitutional Court in 1915 to rule that they could ignore ECtHR judgements Putin's representative persuaded the RCC to tone this down to a decision that where any court felt that an ECtHR decision was incompatible with the Russian Constitution, or when the Government had a similar view, the matter was to be referred to the RCC (and the RCC made it clear that they could see no incompatibilities between ECHR and the Russian constitution) and when a court felt that a law was incompatible with ECHR it should be referred to RCC to review whether that Russian law was compatible with the Russian constitution (since incompatibility with ECHR is prima facie evidence of incompatibility with the Russian constitution. In Britain, the courts can certify that an act of parliament is incompatible with ECHR but that does not strike down the act: they must still enforce the act (and this applies to the Supreme Court as well as to lesser courts). Why do the Leave campaigners want yet more independence from ECHR when they already have more independence from it than the Russians, despite it's having been a British-inspired institution in the first place? Why do they pretend that it is somehow connected to EU membership? (Russian acceptance of the convention is not just lip service: they paid out 2Billion Euros on the direction of the ECtHR on one case in 2014, probably more that Britain has paid in in the 53 years since the convention came into force.)
I think I can answer my two "why" questions. The first: because they hate the idea of their being a concept of human rights that might curb their ability to turn Britain into a plutocracy where ordinary people have no rights. The second: because they want to fool people into believing that discarding ECHR is part of leaving the EU rather than an unrelated direct attack on our rights.
(I'm a centrist tending towards the right, but I still hate Britain's accelerating drift into being a plutocracy where ordinary people don't count.)
Tom
June 22, 2016 at 10:44 am
jasona.work (6/22/2016)
/me leans back, marveling at what happens when you toss a crystal into a supersaturated solution...Sounds like the next couple weeks / months are going to be interesting, regardless of the outcome of the vote.
Also sounds like the same things are true all over...
* Politicians aren't worth their weight in garbage
* Voters (in general) are id10ts and will vote for whoever yells loudest / promises them what they think they want
* Water is wet
:hehe:
You got the third one wrong :hehe:. Water is only wet when it's warm enough - try it at -40 degrees and see if it's wet or not.
Tom
June 22, 2016 at 10:58 am
TomThomson (6/22/2016)
jasona.work (6/22/2016)
/me leans back, marveling at what happens when you toss a crystal into a supersaturated solution...Sounds like the next couple weeks / months are going to be interesting, regardless of the outcome of the vote.
Also sounds like the same things are true all over...
* Politicians aren't worth their weight in garbage
* Voters (in general) are id10ts and will vote for whoever yells loudest / promises them what they think they want
* Water is wet
:hehe:
You got the third one wrong :hehe:. Water is only wet when it's warm enough - try it at -40 degrees and see if it's wet or not.
Geez, next you're going to tell me that depending on the garbage, it might be worth less than a politician...
:hehe:
June 22, 2016 at 11:18 am
jasona.work (6/22/2016)
TomThomson (6/22/2016)
jasona.work (6/22/2016)
/me leans back, marveling at what happens when you toss a crystal into a supersaturated solution...Sounds like the next couple weeks / months are going to be interesting, regardless of the outcome of the vote.
Also sounds like the same things are true all over...
* Politicians aren't worth their weight in garbage
* Voters (in general) are id10ts and will vote for whoever yells loudest / promises them what they think they want
* Water is wet
:hehe:
You got the third one wrong :hehe:. Water is only wet when it's warm enough - try it at -40 degrees and see if it's wet or not.
Geez, next you're going to tell me that depending on the garbage, it might be worth less than a politician...
:hehe:
Maybe not. That means the politician's value would be greater than the garbage. 😉
June 22, 2016 at 11:23 am
So, anyone want to start up a discussion like this closer to the US November elections?
[Commentary deleted by me]
I decided I was getting a little too vitriolic with my descriptions, apologies to anyone who may have been annoyed / offended by them.
And I can't spell "too"
June 22, 2016 at 11:29 am
TomThomson (6/22/2016)
jasona.work (6/22/2016)
/me leans back, marveling at what happens when you toss a crystal into a supersaturated solution...Sounds like the next couple weeks / months are going to be interesting, regardless of the outcome of the vote.
Also sounds like the same things are true all over...
* Politicians aren't worth their weight in garbage
* Voters (in general) are id10ts and will vote for whoever yells loudest / promises them what they think they want
* Water is wet
:hehe:
You got the third one wrong :hehe:. Water is only wet when it's warm enough - try it at -40 degrees and see if it's wet or not.
Eh-hem... Water is only wet when it hits a sweet spot in the temperature range. When at or above 100 C or 212 F, it's a vapor / gas that is not terribly wet until it condensates again.
June 22, 2016 at 11:31 am
jasona.work (6/22/2016)
So, anyone want to start up a discussion like this closer to the US November elections?[Commentary deleted by me]
I decided I was getting a little too vitriolic with my descriptions, apologies to anyone who may have been annoyed / offended by them.
And I can't spell "too"
The only thing I'm going to say on that is I don't vote for bullies, no matter what party they pretend to serve or what stage (local vs state vs national) they are running on.
June 22, 2016 at 1:39 pm
Brandie Tarvin (6/22/2016)
BWFC (6/22/2016)
Lynn Pettis (6/21/2016)
Brandie Tarvin (6/21/2016)
Lynn Pettis (6/20/2016)
Sorry for the technical question in The Thread, but I just have to ask everyone around the water cooler what they think.Does anyone else see a problem with the following code?
Create Trigger tr_TriggerName on dbo.OperationsSIGACTTable Instead Of Insert, Update
AS
Begin
Insert Into OperationsSIGACTTable (Col1, Col2, Summary, .... , ColN)
Select Col1, Col2, RemoveSpecialChars(Summary) , .... , ColN
From inserted i;
End
I was going to snigger and snort and gfaw over this one, but after reading the following posts I see the issue has already been pointed out.
This is what happens when DBA wanna bees do knee jerk reactions to solve data issues without thinking or talking to the only DBA in the company. Trust me, yesterday was not a good day for me, I actually talked out loud about maybe looking for a new job. I got talked down from that ledge.
Could somebody explain what's wrong with it please? I know nothing about triggers. I'm the reporting guy so they're not the kind of thing I come across. I've never had any call to use one but I'd be in grave danger of falling into whatever traps lie within that it if I ever needed a trigger.
"Instead Of Insert, Update" means that when someone tries to insert data into or update data in table dbo.OperationsSIGACTTable, the trigger will rollback the insert / update and then log the history of the attempted insert somewhere. This is a good idea in practice. The OP, however, has chosen the exact same table in which to insert the attempted data insert/update. Which will yet again trigger the trigger if recursive triggers are allowed. Think of it as an infinite loop kind of process.
If you have a trigger preventing inserts that is then trying to do its own insert, it's a self-defeating process. And updates are just as bad.
The "inserted" table the SQL is pulling from is a non-documented "invisible" table that only exists for the length of the transaction. Everything that gets inserted / updated finds itself in the inserted table until the next update / insert happens elsewhere. There is also a "deleted" table that does the same thing for deletes and updates (because an update is actually a delete followed by an insert that we never see).
Does that help?
EDIT: Here is a TechNet article on SQL 2008 R2 INSTEAD OF triggers. Nothing's really changed in SQL 2012 that I can tell.
Some small corrections to this explanation. (Apologies if this is a double post, I did not yet read all posts on this thread)
First: preventing an insert and instead logging the attempt can be a good use of an INSTEAD OF trigger, but it has other purposes as well.
Second, it will not actually do the insert and the roll it back.
The effect of any INSTEAD OF trigger is that SQL Server will execute the trigger *instead of* doing what the operation says. If it is required that the operation itself is also done, then it has to be done in the trigger. There are good use cases for doing this, as well as for not doing it. A very good use of instead of triggers is for instance to ensure that a non-updatable view can be the target of an insert, update, or delete. (I have used this in the past).
The trigger that was posted here is actually not a bad idea - if it had been posted as just an INSTEAD OF INSERT trigger. When someone tries to insert data that has invalid character, then the trigger will silently strip out those characters and insert the rest of the data.
The big issue with this trigger is that it is defined as in INSTEAD OF INSERT, UPDATE trigger. So when you try to update a row, the update is ignored, and a fresh copy of the row (with the modified data) is inserted into the table. Which either fails or succeeds, depending on whether any primary key or unique constraint exists.
This trigger as an INSTEAD OF INSERT trigger, along with a different INSTEAD OF UPDATE trigger that replaces an update with the same update plus the illegal character stripping can in some cases be a valid implementation of a business requirement.
(For performance, I would still prefer not to have the user-defined function)
June 22, 2016 at 1:45 pm
jasona.work (6/22/2016)
So, anyone want to start up a discussion like this closer to the US November elections?[Commentary deleted by me]
I decided I was getting a little too vitriolic with my descriptions, apologies to anyone who may have been annoyed / offended by them.
And I can't spell "too"
The only thing wrong with that is that there would be so very little to say that's any good.
June 22, 2016 at 1:49 pm
Brandie Tarvin (6/22/2016)
jasona.work (6/22/2016)
So, anyone want to start up a discussion like this closer to the US November elections?[Commentary deleted by me]
I decided I was getting a little too vitriolic with my descriptions, apologies to anyone who may have been annoyed / offended by them.
And I can't spell "too"
The only thing I'm going to say on that is I don't vote for bullies, no matter what party they pretend to serve or what stage (local vs state vs national) they are running on.
Does that mean that you're not voting on the presidential elections? :hehe:
Sorry, it just slipped out of my fingers.:Whistling:
June 22, 2016 at 1:53 pm
Luis Cazares (6/22/2016)
Brandie Tarvin (6/22/2016)
jasona.work (6/22/2016)
So, anyone want to start up a discussion like this closer to the US November elections?[Commentary deleted by me]
I decided I was getting a little too vitriolic with my descriptions, apologies to anyone who may have been annoyed / offended by them.
And I can't spell "too"
The only thing I'm going to say on that is I don't vote for bullies, no matter what party they pretend to serve or what stage (local vs state vs national) they are running on.
Does that mean that you're not voting on the presidential elections? :hehe:
Sorry, it just slipped out of my fingers.:Whistling:
That doesn't mean it isn't true.
June 22, 2016 at 2:03 pm
Ed Wagner (6/22/2016)
Luis Cazares (6/22/2016)
Brandie Tarvin (6/22/2016)
jasona.work (6/22/2016)
So, anyone want to start up a discussion like this closer to the US November elections?[Commentary deleted by me]
I decided I was getting a little too vitriolic with my descriptions, apologies to anyone who may have been annoyed / offended by them.
And I can't spell "too"
The only thing I'm going to say on that is I don't vote for bullies, no matter what party they pretend to serve or what stage (local vs state vs national) they are running on.
Does that mean that you're not voting on the presidential elections? :hehe:
Sorry, it just slipped out of my fingers.:Whistling:
That doesn't mean it isn't true.
I'm seriously considering doing a write-in for the two I think would be better than the choices we're staring at...
My two cats...
I'd write-in my dog, but she's 14 and probably wouldn't make it through the whole 4 year term.
June 23, 2016 at 8:28 am
So, on yesterdays' topic, looks like the German tabloid Bild is making promises to try to keep Britain in the EU...
Such as "...Germany will voluntarily provide the baddie for every James Bond film."
June 23, 2016 at 9:31 am
jasona.work (6/23/2016)
So, on yesterdays' topic, looks like the German tabloid Bild is making promises to try to keep Britain in the EU...Such as "...Germany will voluntarily provide the baddie for every James Bond film."
"We'll reserve a place with our towels for you on the hotel sun-lounger"
😀
Viewing 15 posts - 54,691 through 54,705 (of 66,688 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply