August 23, 2012 at 2:44 am
This was removed by the editor as SPAM
August 23, 2012 at 2:46 am
I also knew the fact the question was looking to test, but fell foul of the start at zero like so many others.
I personally think the question would have been improved by omitting the trick.
Paul White
SQLPerformance.com
SQLkiwi blog
@SQL_Kiwi
August 23, 2012 at 2:54 am
Damn. Again. :angry: When will I learn to read the complete question/statement?
Good one. Keep 'em coming.
August 23, 2012 at 3:00 am
Yep, caught out by the 0 too.
Oh well, at least I'm good company!
August 23, 2012 at 3:06 am
Great question.. nearly missed the zero myself!
August 23, 2012 at 3:24 am
Great question, thanks. I very quickly spotted the 1001 rows in the first statement, but wasn't sure if the other table types had different limits. Fortunately decided that the 1000 rows maximum was universal.
Phew 😀
_____________________________________________________________________
[font="Comic Sans MS"]"The difficult tasks we do immediately, the impossible takes a little longer"[/font]
August 23, 2012 at 3:39 am
Good Question !!!!
August 23, 2012 at 4:17 am
Lokesh Vij (8/22/2012)
I knew there is a limit of 1000 records. But got it wrong 🙁Overlooked the question: Inserts start from 0 that makes the first statement to exceed this limit as well.
Nevermind, a good question indeed 🙂
Yea, he got me on that one too. Knew the limit but answered too quickly.
August 23, 2012 at 4:22 am
Looks like about a third of us answered before coffee and failed to take into account the first one started with value 0.
August 23, 2012 at 4:43 am
I didn't like the way the question was asked.
I answered correctly, but didn't even consider the number of rows, but just because @Exceptions wasn't been declared in the query statement (or did I miss it?).
Furthermore I didn't like the trick part of it that the first statement would insert 1001 rows. If this question was to show that you can insert 1000 rows via a row value expression, why not end with 999 or start with 1, so that the answer would be S,E,E.
Learned something though.
August 23, 2012 at 4:47 am
I missed the (0) too. I should have stuck with my first inclination, "Hey, there's no CREATE statements, so they'd all be errors..." *snap* 😀
Good question. Learned something today. Thanks!
August 23, 2012 at 4:53 am
Nice question! Thanks 🙂
August 23, 2012 at 5:32 am
Very Good Question !!!! 🙂
August 23, 2012 at 6:09 am
For once I am going to say that the table declarations were best left out -- they would not have helped, and just might have muddied the waters.
From the repetitive context of the question, it was clear that the tables had the same basic structure.
We can tell from the format of the names that they are a table variable, a temp table, and a table, respectively.
The only options given (success or a specific error message) make it clear that the question is specifically about the limit of the number of rows given in the INSERT statement.
So including the table declarations would have made the question that much harder to read, given us no more relevant information, and would have presented a much greater chance for a typo to be jumped on by the more pedantic of us.
I got this question wrong, because I didn't know of the limitation, and I prefer to research after answering for these QotDs. So I learned something today. Great question!
August 23, 2012 at 7:09 am
It's too early to be thinking about 1's and 0's. :pinch: Thanks for the great question, but I guess it would help if I read the question all the way through.
Now to go find my friend Mr. Caffeine who I should have consulted before attempting to answer.
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 62 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply