June 18, 2014 at 6:03 am
Ed Wagner (6/18/2014)
On site means on site, not Azure - plain and simple.
Precisely. All on-site databases are 2012, meaning 2000 can't be the answer. And since an Azure database can't be 2000 (can it?!), Azure was the only possible answer. (I construed "on-site databases are 2012" as meaning "all on-site databases are 2012", not "all databases are on-site and 2012" - I think that was the most reasonable interpretation.)
John
June 18, 2014 at 6:09 am
John Mitchell-245523 (6/18/2014)
Ed Wagner (6/18/2014)
On site means on site, not Azure - plain and simple.Precisely. All on-site databases are 2012, meaning 2000 can't be the answer. And since an Azure database can't be 2000 (can it?!), Azure was the only possible answer. (I construed "on-site databases are 2012" as meaning "all on-site databases are 2012", not "all databases are on-site and 2012" - I think that was the most reasonable interpretation.)
John
I disagree there. It doesn't say that all on site databases are 2012, it says that uses 2012. That doesn't preclude there being 2000 databases on site. It is therefore no less likely than them using Azure and, given that there is no mention of Azure in the question, in my opinion, actually more likely.
How to post a question to get the most help http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537
June 18, 2014 at 6:12 am
BWFC (6/18/2014)
I disagree there. It doesn't say that all on site databases are 2012, it says that uses 2012. That doesn't preclude there being 2000 databases on site. It is therefore no less likely than them using Azure and, given that there is no mention of Azure in the question, in my opinion, actually more likely.
Yes, fair point - it is slightly ambiguous. I would still interpret that, in the absence of any further qualifiers, as meaning that they use 2012 for all databases. But I can see how others may not.
John
June 18, 2014 at 6:22 am
John Mitchell-245523 (6/18/2014)
BWFC (6/18/2014)
I disagree there. It doesn't say that all on site databases are 2012, it says that uses 2012. That doesn't preclude there being 2000 databases on site. It is therefore no less likely than them using Azure and, given that there is no mention of Azure in the question, in my opinion, actually more likely.Yes, fair point - it is slightly ambiguous. I would still interpret that, in the absence of any further qualifiers, as meaning that they use 2012 for all databases. But I can see how others may not.
John
So the only conclusion is this:
there is a need for an extra answer "It depends"
😛
Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP
June 18, 2014 at 6:27 am
After narrowing it done to 2000 or Cloud, and realizing neither was valid by the question's own logic, I went with Cloud because with most QotD, going with the more modern technology is the intent.
June 18, 2014 at 6:31 am
what about "None of these" 😉
--rhythmk
------------------------------------------------------------------
To post your question use below link
https://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/forum-etiquette-how-to-post-datacode-on-a-forum-to-get-the-best-help
🙂
June 18, 2014 at 6:54 am
I was also tossing between 2000 or Cloud, but selected 2000 option
:crazy: :crying:
June 18, 2014 at 7:24 am
Koen Verbeeck (6/18/2014)
BWFC (6/18/2014)
Koen Verbeeck (6/18/2014)
BWFC (6/18/2014)
You are working for a company that has uses SQL 2012 for their on site databases.
This explicitly rules out that the databases are in the cloud, the answer to this question seems no better than a guess.
Indeed. The question is like: "... and there is no A."
The explanation: "Haha. There still might be A, because you know, the company is progressive."
Actually, on a second read, the question doesn't rule out the fact that there are databases in the cloud. However, I wouldn't necessarily make the connection between using 2012 and having databases on the cloud. If we're playing Technology Inferences((T) Neil Burton) it's a similar leap to think 'this lot are so backward they're still using 2012 when the true innovators are already on 2014. They've probably still got 2000 databases somewhere'.
On site means on site. Even a private cloud is not possible, since SQL Azure is not a private cloud technology.
I agree it was not a well worded question.... however it says
"You are working for a company that has uses SQL 2012 for their on site databases"
It does not state that they do not have any cloud databases or what version the cloud databases would be. It only states that the databases that are on site are 2012.
Badly worded, but you cant say that they said the databases are all on site and 2012 - because they didnt say that!
June 18, 2014 at 7:30 am
danielfountain (6/18/2014)
Badly worded, but you cant say that they said the databases are all on site and 2012 - because they didnt say that!
Maybe they use SQL 2000 for their off-site databases 😉
If a DBA can accidentally connect to Azure, he can also accidentally connect to an off-site database 🙂
Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP
June 18, 2014 at 7:32 am
And where in the question does it say that the fellow DBA is working for the same company? I regulary get asked questions from fellow DBAs in other companies.
June 18, 2014 at 8:11 am
And another thing!!!
the cloud is the more likely given that the company is progressive enought to have everything on site running SQL 2012
The company I work for is constantly employing, researching and developing new technology. They could easily be considered progressive when it comes to technology. However when it comes to security, they're massively paranoid and the shadow that passes across the CIO's face when cloud databases are mentioned in his hearing is a sight to behold. Score another one for not making assumptions.
How to post a question to get the most help http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537
June 18, 2014 at 8:17 am
Koen Verbeeck (6/18/2014)
The answer is incorrect.The question clearly states that the databases are on site. Thus, by the process of elimination, the corruption answer is the only one left.
Wrong! The question says that the company uses SQL Server 2012 for its onsite databases. It says nothing at all about what the company uses for its offsite databases.
June 18, 2014 at 8:33 am
BWFC (6/18/2014)
Toreador (6/18/2014)
You are working for a company that has
usesSQL 2012 for their on site databases. A fellow DBA is trying to do a quick check on a database by running this query:I'm surprised that people are claiming that this statement proves the answer wrong. It's what led me straight to the correct answer.
They use SQL 2012 for their on site databases. Why include the qualifier "on site"?
The DBA is doing a quick link on "a database" - rather than "one of these databases".
Ah - "on site" is included, because "a database" is somewhere else. So could be on a server hosted at a different site, in which case the answer is SQL2000. Or it could be in the cloud. Which is more likely? They're using SQL2012, so less likely that they're using SQL2000 elsewhere. Of course the company might have just bought another company who were 15 years out of date in their technology, but the balance of probabilities seemed to favour the cloud 🙂
I agree that it doesn't prove the answer wrong but it certainly goes no way to proving the answer right either. I'm pretty sure that a straw poll of users on here would find more people using 2012 and 2000 together than using 2012 and the cloud. The point is, that the question relies on some huge assumptions and one of those assumptions is effectively a coin toss.
I read that statement as "we have a bunch of databases, but for the onsite databases we use SQL 2012." Throwing on-site into the mix is kind of a clue as to the direction implied with this question imho.
Granted the grammatical error of "has uses SQL 2012" can contribute to some confusion. Eliminating one of those words ("has" or "uses") to make sense of the statement clears that up. Combine that with the "onsite" clue and the typical standing assumption for all QOTD that we evaluate it against current releases/technology, and we have a pretty straight forward question.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
June 18, 2014 at 8:43 am
Stewart "Arturius" Campbell (6/18/2014)
IMHO, it was a coin toss between SQL 2000 and Azure.I opted for cloud, as i deduced that using SQL2012 for on-site databases would be unlikely (but, granted, not impossible) to be still running SQL 2000 somewhere.
If I remember correctly, a SQL Server 2012 Management Studio session would not be able to connect to a SQL 2000 instance, but could very well be used to connect to an Azure instance.
SSMS 2012 can connect to both
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
June 18, 2014 at 9:20 am
Koen Verbeeck (6/18/2014)
The answer is incorrect.The question clearly states that the databases are on site. Thus, by the process of elimination, the corruption answer is the only one left.
Good point. I still picked the wrong answer, but nevertheless the point above is valid.
- webrunner
-------------------
A SQL query walks into a bar and sees two tables. He walks up to them and asks, "Can I join you?"
Ref.: http://tkyte.blogspot.com/2009/02/sql-joke.html
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 69 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply