October 13, 2011 at 5:15 pm
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
patrickmcginnis59 (10/13/2011)
I was just offering an honest opinion of what I saw as an area of improvement.Ah, nothing like a good thread abduction to attempt to make a statement. I do love that.
Not sure what a thread abduction is. Ready to learn though!
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
I had originally replied that I didn't think that T-SQL was all that good a language.
Your opinion. It has its quirks and foibles like any logical programming language does. It happens to be declarative instead of procedural as its primary and this is usually annoying to those who come to SQL from the front end perspective. It does allow for procedural components but that's not its primary purpose so they feel like add ons... because they are, particularly to a number of the ANSI standards.
So agreement here.
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
SSCrazy then replied that T-SQL was way more powerful than the query engine in Access
Actually, that's Sean Lange. SSCrazy is merely his forum title, like any of the other forums with those 'how many posts you have' kind of things. We usually ignore them round here but I realize you're new and may not be used to the interface.
Thats fine, it was my mistake, I was certain his mother named him SSCrazy.
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
and of course I said I couldn't address that because I didn't consider T-SQL the query engine.
Of course it isn't, the same way that VBA, VB.Net, and C# are not the actual compiler. They are, however, your interface to them, the same way that T-SQL is the interface to the SQL Server Engine and Optimizers.
More agreement then.
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
You are being willful in purposely misdirecting the point of the statement.
No, I was clearly discussing T-SQL the language, there was no misdirecting, especially if you would retrace your steps through this thread. I plainly and simply asserted I didn't consider T-SQL the query engine. There was no trick or misdirection.
"I don't consider either VBA or T-SQL to be a query engine so I can't really answer to that."
How can that be even remotely seen as a misdirection is beyond me.
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
The Query Engine that lies under the query mechanics of the Access system (MSDE/JET) are not as powerful as the encoding that lies in the optimizers for SQL Server. As a few examples, Tempdb secondary I/O, sub-table spooling, index short-circuiting for semi-top queries, and a number of other items. Access' JET engine is a brute force tool as it's usually not expected to deal with the same data volumes.
I'm hopeful that the folks viewing SQL and Access as one big blob of programming will read your excellent explanation.
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
I think this is when your head exploded right?
This is where things start getting unprofessional again.
This is simply up to you as to its professionalism. But thats a pretty common phrase on the web and I can't help you through every internet experience. I can tell you that there are plenty of friendly (and very employed) folks who have used that term, even on themselves. If you are still offended let me know and I'll throw you some links on its very inoffensive nature.
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
Again, if you think T-SQL is SQL Server or "T-SQL is a query engine" then in my opinion you should reconsider, and I meant to emphasis how important I considered this with the employment metaphor.
A poor choice of approach, unfortunately.
Feel free to explain. I'm willing to learn.
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
However, it's an argument of semantics, not intent. Being that detailed when discussing things with an obvious newbie (not you, the OP) to the environment is more likely to confuse than educate.
I wasn't objecting to his characterizations, I was actually posting in support for possible reasons he would be considering Access. If you had followed the thread you would know this.
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
After all, many of us do this for a living, and qualifications for duty can clearly be a point of discussion.
Sure, in a discussion about employment. It has no place here. The validity of the statement does.
SQL server discussions are frequently about the work we do. I'm sorry, wish it could be just a hobby with money floating down from the sky.
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
But I don't personally find you a bad fellow because you view SQL server as just a datastore.
Now... thank you, that just made my day. :w00t: I haven't laughed that hard in a while. Might I recommend you read through Ninja's history of posts before you decide to continue down that path?
Well, or don't. I always need more humor.
I'm sure Ninja is a fine fellow, if he doesn't want to be all modular about software, its not going to affect his humanity. And we can all use the humor right?
October 13, 2011 at 6:14 pm
patrickmcginnis59 (10/13/2011)
Not sure what a thread abduction is. Ready to learn though!
Must admit, that's kind of funny, considering your later comment about things being common on the internet. Definately different circles, although I got used to dial-up boards so that's bound to skew my thinking. It's also known as a derail, when we take the topic off the original point, which (originally) was how to convert a T-SQL Proc into an Access query, and if there were any automation tools.
Thats fine, it was my mistake, I was certain his mother named him SSCrazy.
Just as mine named me Evil Kraig. She knew right at birth I'd need this goatee.
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
You are being willful in purposely misdirecting the point of the statement.No, I was clearly discussing T-SQL the language, there was no misdirecting, especially if you would retrace your steps through this thread. I plainly and simply asserted I didn't consider T-SQL the query engine. There was no trick or misdirection.
"I don't consider either VBA or T-SQL to be a query engine so I can't really answer to that."
How can that be even remotely seen as a misdirection is beyond me.
Shall we discuss the originating quote? Btw, I don't usually respond to threads I don't read through unless they're 20+ pages. Happens on occassion though.
VBA has much better syntax and a more sophisticated parser. T-SQL's main advantage is that its server side and closer to the better DBMS (SQL Server versus JET), but other than that it seems very primitive to me. I don't consider either VBA or T-SQL to be a query engine so I can't really answer to that.
T-SQL, as you already mentioned, is directly associated to the SQL Engine to the point that it will not function against any other environment, which you've noted. They are reasonably synonymous.
VBA, on the other hand, is a generic set of VB6 coding libraries used through the MS Office environment, with particular activations for each of their softwares. They are primarily display based. The actual querying mechanics inside of Access accept only "Microsoft Access SQL" (ANSI-89 (for 2k7) with some different reserved words), which would have been more appropriate.
Had you compared these I would have said you were nitpicking semantics, as they are both tightly tied to the engines they drive. VBA and .NET/ASP are the equivalents. Thus, I feel you were purposely misdirecting the point of Sean's statement:
t-sql is WAY more powerful than the query engine in Access. VBA would be the programming language that can interface with Access.
This is simply up to you as to its professionalism. But thats a pretty common phrase on the web and I can't help you through every internet experience. I can tell you that there are plenty of friendly (and very employed) folks who have used that term, even on themselves. If you are still offended let me know and I'll throw you some links on its very inoffensive nature.
There is a far cry between offensive and unprofessional. I've also gone flying way off the edge of both. Your head asplode is as old as surprise buttsecks. They were funny and popular at the time. Now they're just there and with no clue that you're referencing a meme come off very differently then humor.
A poor choice of approach, unfortunately.
Feel free to explain. I'm willing to learn.
As you yourself have noted, this is a technical forum, preferably discussing the technical merits and mechanics between different methodologies. Lurking around here are (amongst others) an English Teacher, a professional writer, a couple of retirees, and a few folks just curious. It is not about the employment, but about the most effective solutions. Please note, I didn't say best, I don't live in the Ivory Tower either.
However, commenting on the technical merits of someone's approach is much more effective, and more likely to get an intelligent and thoughful response, then attacking someone's personal life or ability.
Note: I do say this from experience and had that point shoved down my throat more than once as well.
I wasn't objecting to his characterizations, I was actually posting in support for possible reasons he would be considering Access. If you had followed the thread you would know this.
Considering your other assumptions, I could see how you made this one. Partially this is because we don't consider VBA vs. T-SQL an equivalent discussion. Using an ADP, you can easily avoid the Jet Engine and Microsoft Access SQL. VBA is still quite usable in the rest of it's state ignoring the entire engine components. However, all your pass-through queries will STILL be written in T-SQL.
Thus, they are non-equivalent for comparison. Watermelons to Automobiles.
Never stop learning, even if it hurts. Ego bruises are practically mandatory as you learn unless you've never risked enough to make a mistake.
For better assistance in answering your questions[/url] | Forum Netiquette
For index/tuning help, follow these directions.[/url] |Tally Tables[/url]
Twitter: @AnyWayDBA
October 13, 2011 at 7:15 pm
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
patrickmcginnis59 (10/13/2011)
Not sure what a thread abduction is. Ready to learn though!Must admit, that's kind of funny, considering your later comment about things being common on the internet. Definately different circles, although I got used to dial-up boards so that's bound to skew my thinking. It's also known as a derail, when we take the topic off the original point, which (originally) was how to convert a T-SQL Proc into an Access query, and if there were any automation tools.
I was very straightforward and direct in my disagreement. I think the obvious notion here is that you guys felt like beating up a new guy (me). My response to Ninja was the most polite way I could find to declaring him completely wrong, in other words, he can hold mistaken information but I will ensure it doesn't affect me. Whats more concerning to me is how wrong he is after 7000 visits here.
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
You are being willful in purposely misdirecting the point of the statement.No, I was clearly discussing T-SQL the language, there was no misdirecting, especially if you would retrace your steps through this thread. I plainly and simply asserted I didn't consider T-SQL the query engine. There was no trick or misdirection.
"I don't consider either VBA or T-SQL to be a query engine so I can't really answer to that."
How can that be even remotely seen as a misdirection is beyond me.
Shall we discuss the originating quote? Btw, I don't usually respond to threads I don't read through unless they're 20+ pages. Happens on occassion though.
Can you please not ask permission and just proceed to discuss what you want to discuss?
October 13, 2011 at 7:54 pm
Well I'm sorry, it seems you actually did discuss the quote. So my apologies for that.
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
VBA has much better syntax and a more sophisticated parser. T-SQL's main advantage is that its server side and closer to the better DBMS (SQL Server versus JET), but other than that it seems very primitive to me. I don't consider either VBA or T-SQL to be a query engine so I can't really answer to that.
T-SQL, as you already mentioned, is directly associated to the SQL Engine to the point that it will not function against any other environment, which you've noted. They are reasonably synonymous.
So at least we agree on that.
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
VBA, on the other hand, is a generic set of VB6 coding libraries used through the MS Office environment, with particular activations for each of their softwares. They are primarily display based. The actual querying mechanics inside of Access accept only "Microsoft Access SQL" (ANSI-89 (for 2k7) with some different reserved words), which would have been more appropriate.
So again we agree. Obviously they are tied to forms and I won't object with that.
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
Had you compared these I would have said you were nitpicking semantics, as they are both tightly tied to the engines they drive. VBA and .NET/ASP are the equivalents. Thus, I feel you were purposely misdirecting the point of Sean's statement:t-sql is WAY more powerful than the query engine in Access. VBA would be the programming language that can interface with Access.
Well I don't understand what you're saying here, so I'll have to stand by my assertions. There were no misdirections.
I'm going to skip memes. You are free to tell me how uncool I am if you feel it matters.
Evil Kraig F (10/13/2011)
A poor choice of approach, unfortunately.
Feel free to explain. I'm willing to learn.
As you yourself have noted, this is a technical forum, preferably discussing the technical merits and mechanics between different methodologies. Lurking around here are (amongst others) an English Teacher, a professional writer, a couple of retirees, and a few folks just curious. It is not about the employment, but about the most effective solutions. Please note, I didn't say best, I don't live in the Ivory Tower either.
However, commenting on the technical merits of someone's approach is much more effective, and more likely to get an intelligent and thoughful response, then attacking someone's personal life or ability.
I disqualified him from an imaginary job, and I was sincere and polite in doing so, I even added an internet smiley to emphasis the relative inconsequentiality of my decision. I have never attacked his personal life or ability, but I can understand that you might want to make it look like I did. I clearly prefer that he would know more about what he's posting about, but we should all be ready to learn and theres no shame in my stating this preference.
October 14, 2011 at 5:24 am
This is getting about 100 lights years beyond pointless.
I'm not offended in any way if that still is the issue (skipped the last 5 messages or so).
Please take this elsewhere.
Viewing 5 posts - 31 through 34 (of 34 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply