June 22, 2018 at 8:34 am
Chris Harshman - Friday, June 22, 2018 8:20 AMjasona.work - Friday, June 22, 2018 6:19 AMThat feeling when you've got a Linked Server connection to a remote site who thought they had everything set up and you just needed to get your end set up, but they didn't have everything set up right so now your end works and theirs doesn't and the people who require the data from the remote site are calling you...
:crazy::sick:Sorry man, I feel for you when dealing with linked servers. My problem tends to be somehow the network admins keep managing to screw up Kerberos and delegation so linked servers that used to work stop working and of course it's a database problem.
You know, I'd almost trade you problems...
Mine is SQL connecting to a remote Oracle server, over a WAN link that sometimes decides to crap out half-way through a data pull, or while SQL is waiting on the Oracle to start sending data, leaving a stuck connection that won't die and can't be killed...
But when the customer gets to me about it, and I test it, it's working fine again...
June 22, 2018 at 9:21 am
jasona.work - Friday, June 22, 2018 8:34 AMChris Harshman - Friday, June 22, 2018 8:20 AMjasona.work - Friday, June 22, 2018 6:19 AMThat feeling when you've got a Linked Server connection to a remote site who thought they had everything set up and you just needed to get your end set up, but they didn't have everything set up right so now your end works and theirs doesn't and the people who require the data from the remote site are calling you...
:crazy::sick:Sorry man, I feel for you when dealing with linked servers. My problem tends to be somehow the network admins keep managing to screw up Kerberos and delegation so linked servers that used to work stop working and of course it's a database problem.
You know, I'd almost trade you problems...
Mine is SQL connecting to a remote Oracle server, over a WAN link that sometimes decides to crap out half-way through a data pull, or while SQL is waiting on the Oracle to start sending data, leaving a stuck connection that won't die and can't be killed...
But when the customer gets to me about it, and I test it, it's working fine again...
Hey - I've had that problem. The WAN doesn't die frequently, but when it does, it's a disaster. My usual problem is that the query takes forever to run on the Oracle server.
June 22, 2018 at 11:03 am
Ed Wagner - Friday, June 22, 2018 9:21 AMjasona.work - Friday, June 22, 2018 8:34 AMChris Harshman - Friday, June 22, 2018 8:20 AMjasona.work - Friday, June 22, 2018 6:19 AMThat feeling when you've got a Linked Server connection to a remote site who thought they had everything set up and you just needed to get your end set up, but they didn't have everything set up right so now your end works and theirs doesn't and the people who require the data from the remote site are calling you...
:crazy::sick:Sorry man, I feel for you when dealing with linked servers. My problem tends to be somehow the network admins keep managing to screw up Kerberos and delegation so linked servers that used to work stop working and of course it's a database problem.
You know, I'd almost trade you problems...
Mine is SQL connecting to a remote Oracle server, over a WAN link that sometimes decides to crap out half-way through a data pull, or while SQL is waiting on the Oracle to start sending data, leaving a stuck connection that won't die and can't be killed...
But when the customer gets to me about it, and I test it, it's working fine again...Hey - I've had that problem. The WAN doesn't die frequently, but when it does, it's a disaster. My usual problem is that the query takes forever to run on the Oracle server.
It's especially annoying because it fails silently, just leaving a running / idle query behind. In my customers' case, it's kind of worse because while if we were doing nightly data pulls, something could be set to check at a set time "did the data arrive," and if not, run again. But nooo, they *require* near real-time data, which means at random points through out the day, they're going out through the link to get their data.
:unsure:
June 22, 2018 at 1:20 pm
Geez, why are people coming here expecting some one here to write code for them for free?
June 22, 2018 at 2:27 pm
Lynn Pettis - Friday, June 22, 2018 1:20 PMGeez, why are people coming here expecting some one here to write code for them for free?
See the following article. It's because they want to be able to someday say they're "Not Average". 😛:laugh:😀:Whistling::pinch:
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Editorial/173191/
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
June 22, 2018 at 2:40 pm
Jeff Moden - Friday, June 22, 2018 2:27 PMLynn Pettis - Friday, June 22, 2018 1:20 PMGeez, why are people coming here expecting some one here to write code for them for free?See the following article. It's because they want to be able to someday say they're "Not Average". 😛:laugh:😀:Whistling::pinch:
Read that article. Saying your not average and proving it are two separate issues. I still rate myself at 5/10 and I have been working with SQL Server for over 20 years. Solomon R made a comment on a post here on SSC in the past week that I finally tested. Not all implicit conversions prevent using an index. Starting to believe that one best practice for SQL Server is to use Windows collations and not SQL collations.
June 22, 2018 at 3:08 pm
Lynn Pettis - Friday, June 22, 2018 2:40 PMJeff Moden - Friday, June 22, 2018 2:27 PMLynn Pettis - Friday, June 22, 2018 1:20 PMGeez, why are people coming here expecting some one here to write code for them for free?See the following article. It's because they want to be able to someday say they're "Not Average". 😛:laugh:😀:Whistling::pinch:
Read that article. Saying your not average and proving it are two separate issues. I still rate myself at 5/10 and I have been working with SQL Server for over 20 years. Solomon R made a comment on a post here on SSC in the past week that I finally tested. Not all implicit conversions prevent using an index. Starting to believe that one best practice for SQL Server is to use Windows collations and not SQL collations.
When I get a score from someone stating their ability on a scale of 1 - 10 I do a little before I assess that score. If the person has experience and rates them self 5 or lower I do something like 15 - TheirScore. If they have little or no experience and the score is > 5 I use TheirScore - 5. But for either if TheirScore is 10 I assume it to be no higher than a 4 or 5 unless they have been doing this forever. I can't remember the term for this but truly inexperienced people think they are way better than they really are and experienced people start to underrate themselves as they get better.
You have to keep in mind that your assessment is how you would stack up on average to a random sampling of people in the industry. And you sir would be far higher than a 5 on ability of a truly random sample of people working with databases.
_______________________________________________________________
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/
June 22, 2018 at 3:39 pm
Sean Lange - Friday, June 22, 2018 3:08 PMLynn Pettis - Friday, June 22, 2018 2:40 PMJeff Moden - Friday, June 22, 2018 2:27 PMLynn Pettis - Friday, June 22, 2018 1:20 PMGeez, why are people coming here expecting some one here to write code for them for free?See the following article. It's because they want to be able to someday say they're "Not Average". 😛:laugh:😀:Whistling::pinch:
Read that article. Saying your not average and proving it are two separate issues. I still rate myself at 5/10 and I have been working with SQL Server for over 20 years. Solomon R made a comment on a post here on SSC in the past week that I finally tested. Not all implicit conversions prevent using an index. Starting to believe that one best practice for SQL Server is to use Windows collations and not SQL collations.
When I get a score from someone stating their ability on a scale of 1 - 10 I do a little before I assess that score. If the person has experience and rates them self 5 or lower I do something like 15 - TheirScore. If they have little or no experience and the score is > 5 I use TheirScore - 5. But for either if TheirScore is 10 I assume it to be no higher than a 4 or 5 unless they have been doing this forever. I can't remember the term for this but truly inexperienced people think they are way better than they really are and experienced people start to underrate themselves as they get better.
You have to keep in mind that your assessment is how you would stack up on average to a random sampling of people in the industry. And you sir would be far higher than a 5 on ability of a truly random sample of people working with databases.
The bar I use for myself is higher than I use for others. I know what I know, and I know what I don't know. It is what I don't know that I don't know that keeps my personal assessment low as that last pile of knowledge is bigger than than the first two.
And what was it that Dirty Harry said, "A man needs to know his limitations." Well, at least paraphrased.
June 24, 2018 at 12:52 pm
Lynn Pettis - Friday, June 22, 2018 3:39 PMSean Lange - Friday, June 22, 2018 3:08 PMLynn Pettis - Friday, June 22, 2018 2:40 PMJeff Moden - Friday, June 22, 2018 2:27 PMLynn Pettis - Friday, June 22, 2018 1:20 PMGeez, why are people coming here expecting some one here to write code for them for free?See the following article. It's because they want to be able to someday say they're "Not Average". 😛:laugh:😀:Whistling::pinch:
Read that article. Saying your not average and proving it are two separate issues. I still rate myself at 5/10 and I have been working with SQL Server for over 20 years. Solomon R made a comment on a post here on SSC in the past week that I finally tested. Not all implicit conversions prevent using an index. Starting to believe that one best practice for SQL Server is to use Windows collations and not SQL collations.
When I get a score from someone stating their ability on a scale of 1 - 10 I do a little before I assess that score. If the person has experience and rates them self 5 or lower I do something like 15 - TheirScore. If they have little or no experience and the score is > 5 I use TheirScore - 5. But for either if TheirScore is 10 I assume it to be no higher than a 4 or 5 unless they have been doing this forever. I can't remember the term for this but truly inexperienced people think they are way better than they really are and experienced people start to underrate themselves as they get better.
You have to keep in mind that your assessment is how you would stack up on average to a random sampling of people in the industry. And you sir would be far higher than a 5 on ability of a truly random sample of people working with databases.
The bar I use for myself is higher than I use for others. I know what I know, and I know what I don't know. It is what I don't know that I don't know that keeps my personal assessment low as that last pile of knowledge is bigger than than the first two.
And what was it that Dirty Harry said, "A man needs to know his limitations." Well, at least paraphrased.
I might fall into the same mindset, "grading" myself to a much higher standard than I do others.
Once this was pointedly shown to me, I was sent to a "leadership" class / workshop through work, which required beforehand asking co-workers (both from my team, and other teams) to rate me (anonymously) on various personality traits. I tended to put myself at or below average on most everything, while the other people tended to put me at average or higher...
I suspect I do the same thing when it comes to professional skills...
June 24, 2018 at 12:53 pm
I don't know how this came about, but tomorrow my first SSC article goes up...
😮
June 24, 2018 at 1:08 pm
I'm not going to link (but I'm sure many of you will guess who), and I'm not going to respond to them, but a certain very well known someone just tried called me out about my attitude on a public forum (towards data quality). Considering they're well renowned attitude on these very forums, I'll admit, it's really miffed me off. Hypocrite...</rant>
jasona.work - Sunday, June 24, 2018 12:53 PMI don't know how this came about, but tomorrow my first SSC article goes up...
😮
I look forward to it! Some (not to imply others weren't) of your posts have been really helpful for questions/problems I've had in the past, so I hoping for a good read. (No pressure!) 😀
Thom~
Excuse my typos and sometimes awful grammar. My fingers work faster than my brain does.
Larnu.uk
June 24, 2018 at 1:15 pm
Ok, I just saw another post they just made, which i'm part quoting...
Saying "make a duplicate copy" in SQL or RDBMS is like saying "let's eat fried babies!" To a vegan; it is wrong on so, so many levels. The whole you function of databases, not just SQL, was to remove redundancy not to create duplicates!
I've flagged the post (and Steve, others mods feel free to delete this post), but holy .... That is NOT appropriate! I can assure you from my perspective, as a non-vegan/non-vegetarian, think it appropriate (to say in private or public).
Thom~
Excuse my typos and sometimes awful grammar. My fingers work faster than my brain does.
Larnu.uk
June 24, 2018 at 5:44 pm
Sean Lange - Friday, June 22, 2018 3:08 PMWhen I get a score from someone stating their ability on a scale of 1 - 10 I do a little before I assess that score. If the person has experience and rates them self 5 or lower I do something like 15 - TheirScore. If they have little or no experience and the score is > 5 I use TheirScore - 5. But for either if TheirScore is 10 I assume it to be no higher than a 4 or 5 unless they have been doing this forever. I can't remember the term for this but truly inexperienced people think they are way better than they really are and experienced people start to underrate themselves as they get better.
You have to keep in mind that your assessment is how you would stack up on average to a random sampling of people in the industry. And you sir would be far higher than a 5 on ability of a truly random sample of people working with databases.
And how do you score your ability to score other people abilities?
_____________
Code for TallyGenerator
June 24, 2018 at 6:23 pm
jasona.work - Friday, June 22, 2018 11:03 AMEd Wagner - Friday, June 22, 2018 9:21 AMjasona.work - Friday, June 22, 2018 8:34 AMChris Harshman - Friday, June 22, 2018 8:20 AMjasona.work - Friday, June 22, 2018 6:19 AMThat feeling when you've got a Linked Server connection to a remote site who thought they had everything set up and you just needed to get your end set up, but they didn't have everything set up right so now your end works and theirs doesn't and the people who require the data from the remote site are calling you...
:crazy::sick:Sorry man, I feel for you when dealing with linked servers. My problem tends to be somehow the network admins keep managing to screw up Kerberos and delegation so linked servers that used to work stop working and of course it's a database problem.
You know, I'd almost trade you problems...
Mine is SQL connecting to a remote Oracle server, over a WAN link that sometimes decides to crap out half-way through a data pull, or while SQL is waiting on the Oracle to start sending data, leaving a stuck connection that won't die and can't be killed...
But when the customer gets to me about it, and I test it, it's working fine again...Hey - I've had that problem. The WAN doesn't die frequently, but when it does, it's a disaster. My usual problem is that the query takes forever to run on the Oracle server.
It's especially annoying because it fails silently, just leaving a running / idle query behind. In my customers' case, it's kind of worse because while if we were doing nightly data pulls, something could be set to check at a set time "did the data arrive," and if not, run again. But nooo, they *require* near real-time data, which means at random points through out the day, they're going out through the link to get their data.
:unsure:
How about an update on a remote table (would be bad enough by itself, but we don't stop here), which fires a trigger, containing a remote call to another server (sometimes back to the original server the query is coming from, sometimes not - it's a dynamic query), which executes some task of sending an email or manipulating files via cmd shell, which gets stuck because some network resource is not accessible, so it never comes back with any error code, and both servers got stuck in transaction, and because of beautiful indexing everything is locked...
You wish it would happen during a nightly process, no, it happens during a peak time of user requests, when they all commit their orders right before COB.
_____________
Code for TallyGenerator
June 24, 2018 at 7:13 pm
Sergiy - Sunday, June 24, 2018 6:23 PMjasona.work - Friday, June 22, 2018 11:03 AMEd Wagner - Friday, June 22, 2018 9:21 AMjasona.work - Friday, June 22, 2018 8:34 AMChris Harshman - Friday, June 22, 2018 8:20 AMjasona.work - Friday, June 22, 2018 6:19 AMThat feeling when you've got a Linked Server connection to a remote site who thought they had everything set up and you just needed to get your end set up, but they didn't have everything set up right so now your end works and theirs doesn't and the people who require the data from the remote site are calling you...
:crazy::sick:Sorry man, I feel for you when dealing with linked servers. My problem tends to be somehow the network admins keep managing to screw up Kerberos and delegation so linked servers that used to work stop working and of course it's a database problem.
You know, I'd almost trade you problems...
Mine is SQL connecting to a remote Oracle server, over a WAN link that sometimes decides to crap out half-way through a data pull, or while SQL is waiting on the Oracle to start sending data, leaving a stuck connection that won't die and can't be killed...
But when the customer gets to me about it, and I test it, it's working fine again...Hey - I've had that problem. The WAN doesn't die frequently, but when it does, it's a disaster. My usual problem is that the query takes forever to run on the Oracle server.
It's especially annoying because it fails silently, just leaving a running / idle query behind. In my customers' case, it's kind of worse because while if we were doing nightly data pulls, something could be set to check at a set time "did the data arrive," and if not, run again. But nooo, they *require* near real-time data, which means at random points through out the day, they're going out through the link to get their data.
:unsure:How about an update on a remote table (would be bad enough by itself, but we don't stop here), which fires a trigger, containing a remote call to another server (sometimes back to the original server the query is coming from, sometimes not - it's a dynamic query), which executes some task of sending an email or manipulating files via cmd shell, which gets stuck because some network resource is not accessible, so it never comes back with any error code, and both servers got stuck in transaction, and because of beautiful indexing everything is locked...
You wish it would happen during a nightly process, no, it happens during a peak time of user requests, when they all commit their orders right before COB.
Sir, I salute you.
That's *way* worse than what I deal with.
Viewing 15 posts - 61,711 through 61,725 (of 66,712 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply