August 1, 2023 at 6:38 pm
I hate rebrands/renames. I think it creates confusion and often doesn't make anything better. Either you execute well or you do not and people know that, regardless of name.
However, for the Entra one. The rebrand means that new content for this service is more visible in blogs, whereas older content with AAD falls away. That can be good or bad, but it does give content creators a chance to highlight newer things. Something I hadn't thought of for tech, which can be helpful when there is a lot of stale/outdated/irrelevant content out there.
Actually, that's a great point. Dealing with PostgreSQL, Azure, and a few others, old documentation frequently (very damned frequently), bubbles to the top in searches. Spotting that it's out of data information can be a true pain. By renaming a product entirely, at least you know that everything that matches that new name is likely to be newer information (or at least a more recent copy & paste).
"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
August 1, 2023 at 6:54 pm
I hate rebrands/renames. I think it creates confusion and often doesn't make anything better. Either you execute well or you do not and people know that, regardless of name.
However, for the Entra one. The rebrand means that new content for this service is more visible in blogs, whereas older content with AAD falls away. That can be good or bad, but it does give content creators a chance to highlight newer things. Something I hadn't thought of for tech, which can be helpful when there is a lot of stale/outdated/irrelevant content out there.
Ya gotta be real careful in getting rid of the old stuff. It's like the huge mistake MS made when they got rid of the wonderful CROSSTAB documentation they used to have and replaced it with (ugh!) PIVOT.
And totally agreed on the problems with "rebranding". It's not as easy as when RITZ crackers changed their box type and logo back in the '70s but their ad still rings true "We changed the box but it's still the same ol' RITZ on the inside". The same holds true with software rebranding.... I feel that is' sometimes done just to get away from the brand recognition of a bad product but they've not actually changed the product. In a lot of cases, they've made it even worse.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 15, 2023 at 3:19 pm
You'd think someone working in it would know how to ask for help properly..... developer just sent me.
"the UAT ETL server seems to be really slow this morning. Any reason ?" this could mean any of half a dozen servers.
"which server?"
"I mean the Test ETL server" same follow up question and then ghosted.
smh....
August 15, 2023 at 6:09 pm
You'd think someone working in it would know how to ask for help properly..... developer just sent me.
"the UAT ETL server seems to be really slow this morning. Any reason ?" this could mean any of half a dozen servers.
"which server?"
"I mean the Test ETL server" same follow up question and then ghosted.
smh....
I recently made a massive performance improvement to some new code by rewriting some new code that a developer submitted. This is also the same developer that does the "stress testing" for performance on the dev box. I deployed the new code and he started the test and it started producing a bazillion time-outs and he came back with some really stark I-told-you-so's and ranted about how they had tested a method similar to what I had done and yadda-yadda-yadda. He said he'd leave the test running so I could see...
It turned out that HE had deployed some new code and forgot to commit the code and it had the table locked. I very quietly told him that and the SPID on his box that caused the problem. He committed the code and my new code ran better than they'd ever seen. He blamed it all on the fact that all of our deployment code is required to be deployed in an explicit transaction (and has been for more than a decade now), even though the code provides an on-screen reminder to commit the code if it worked correctly.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 15, 2023 at 6:28 pm
Trying to imagine a scenario where I worked with Jeff Moden and tried to call out his code...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please follow Best Practices For Posting On Forums to receive quicker and higher quality responses
August 15, 2023 at 6:40 pm
Trying to imagine a scenario where I worked with Jeff Moden and tried to call out his code...
That would make a very viral video!!!!!!!!!
Michael L John
If you assassinate a DBA, would you pull a trigger?
To properly post on a forum:
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/61537/
August 15, 2023 at 6:50 pm
Trying to imagine a scenario where I worked with Jeff Moden and tried to call out his code...
Gosh... thanks for the very kind words but I'm far from perfect. If someone like yourself "called out my code", it would be for something that you've already proven and I'd most definitely listen and learn something new or different in the process.
The same goes for you other folks responding. You've all got the right stuff. It wouldn't be a "call out". It would be an adventure for us both to hammer out a problem, whatever it was. There's always a "faster gun" out there.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 16, 2023 at 9:38 pm
jonathan.crawford wrote:Trying to imagine a scenario where I worked with Jeff Moden and tried to call out his code...
Gosh... thanks for the very kind words but I'm far from perfect. If someone like yourself "called out my code", it would be for something that you've already proven and I'd most definitely listen and learn something new or different in the process.
The same goes for you other folks responding. You've all got the right stuff. It wouldn't be a "call out". It would be an adventure for us both to hammer out a problem, whatever it was. There's always a "faster gun" out there.
I wouldn't call out the code written by Jeff. I'd just make a comment about how I think there might be a better way to do it. What to have a look together?
August 17, 2023 at 2:07 am
Jeff Moden wrote:jonathan.crawford wrote:Trying to imagine a scenario where I worked with Jeff Moden and tried to call out his code...
Gosh... thanks for the very kind words but I'm far from perfect. If someone like yourself "called out my code", it would be for something that you've already proven and I'd most definitely listen and learn something new or different in the process.
The same goes for you other folks responding. You've all got the right stuff. It wouldn't be a "call out". It would be an adventure for us both to hammer out a problem, whatever it was. There's always a "faster gun" out there.
I wouldn't call out the code written by Jeff. I'd just make a comment about how I think there might be a better way to do it. What to have a look together?
Nah... you'd be like the other good denizens of this site... you'd already have a coded solution that we could test. 😀
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
August 18, 2023 at 2:45 pm
Whilst installing a new laptop, noted that the download link for sql 2019 developer has disappeared
August 18, 2023 at 2:55 pm
Whilst installing a new laptop, noted that the download link for sql 2019 developer has disappeared
That would be Microsoft's latest SLV policy 🙂
😎
SLV = Short Live Versions 🙂
Although this post is a joke, the underlying concern is that we might be building something dependent on a software version that suddenly becomes unsupported or unavailable. Seen this happening few times, and at an increasing rate.
August 18, 2023 at 3:53 pm
hasn't disappeared. It's here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server/sql-server-2019-resources
The default SQL Server page is always the current version. In the past their web teams haven't gotten good at removing the old version and leaving a few things for download. However, they have moved to a more synched with marketing/engineering to highlight and push people to the latest by default.
It's 2023. Technically, 5 years from SQL Server 2019 ends next year, so this makes sense.
I work in the software business. I see the costs of supporting old versions. At the same time, I don't love the instability of constantly upgrading. Somewhere in there is a happy medium.
What I really wish was that after a company end-of-life's software that they have to license out the code for a third party to support those with valid licenses for a period of time. I do like that MS providing security support for 10 years. At least that's something to ensure you can run a server for a decade (or 7-8 years). Often after that, I think if you heavily firewall the server, you're fine.
August 19, 2023 at 11:03 am
What I really wish was that after a company end-of-life's software that they have to license out the code for a third party to support those with valid licenses for a period of time. I do like that MS providing security support for 10 years. At least that's something to ensure you can run a server for a decade (or 7-8 years). Often after that, I think if you heavily firewall the server, you're fine.
Unfortunately, there often are regulatory compliances that do not respect manufacturers' support constraints.
😎
A few years ago I was working in an environment where there were almost all versions of SQL Server except 4.2, and hundreds of instances of each version. The reason for this was that certifying the software used is also dependent on the SQL Server version used when the software is certified. Upgrading the SQL Server would mean a re-certification of the software, which is both a lengthy and very costly process. Even in a multi $Bn industry, re-certifications are normally deemed too costly.
August 23, 2023 at 9:29 am
I made a boo boo and reported a wrong post.
Steve/Grant/Webmaster - could you please reinstate post 4268917 on this thread?
https://www.sqlservercentral.com/forums/topic/logical-consistency-based-i-o-error-for-tempdb-ndf
Thanks muchly
Viewing 15 posts - 66,421 through 66,435 (of 66,738 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply