No Files For You

Question

No Files For You

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 69 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

sestell1 SSChampion Points: 10230 More actions · Answer 1

It specifically says they are using SQL Server 2012 databases on site. The grammar could be considered ambiguous (although that would be a stretch), since it doesn't explicitly rule out additional cloud-based servers. However without any further information, it is impossible to answer the question, so it is logical to assume that it was defining the parameters of the question.

Bobby Russell SSCrazy Points: 2801 More actions · Answer 2

Fire the guy who added a cloud DB to the ONSITE server and give me my point back! The correct answer here is INCORRECT. This is an ONSITE server. Clearly they wouldn't allow anything but ONSITE DB's, right? 😀

gbritton1 SSCertifiable Points: 6522 More actions · Answer 3

Bobby Russell (6/18/2014)
Fire the guy who added a cloud DB to the ONSITE server and give me my point back! The correct answer here is INCORRECT. This is an ONSITE server. Clearly they wouldn't allow anything but ONSITE DB's, right? 😀

I don't think it's clear. The question tells us:

You are working for a company that has uses SQL 2012 for their on site databases.

but says nothing about that company's offsite databases. They could be anything at all.

Mighty SSCrazy Eights Points: 9063 More actions · Answer 4

Definitions

- "On-site": taking place or situated on a particular site or premises.

- "Off-site": taking place or situated away from a particular site or premises.

So not on-site is off-site. This could be the cloud, or any database that is not on the premises, which could be a SQL Server 2000 database that you connect to.

I guess that more organisations have off-site databases that are not on the cloud.

Sean Lange SSC Guru Points: 286590 More actions · Answer 5

Bobby Russell (6/18/2014)
Fire the guy who added a cloud DB to the ONSITE server and give me my point back! The correct answer here is INCORRECT. This is an ONSITE server. Clearly they wouldn't allow anything but ONSITE DB's, right? 😀

You can have my points...of course you also "got it back" by posting that you wanted you back. Unless you execute DBCC TIMEWARP with the proper parameters there is little you can do. 😀

I can see either the Azure or the 2000 choices as being the MOST LIKELY given the ambiguous wording.

_______________________________________________________________

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/

TomThomson SSC Guru Points: 104773 More actions · Answer 6

Toreador (6/18/2014)
You are working for a company that has uses SQL 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 🙂

That was my reasoning too, and I imagine it is how Andy thought people ought to think. I reckon it was a good question. Two possible situations, which is more probable.

It seems utterly amazing that people are jumping down a falacious "IF A(X) and B(X) implies C(X) then A(X) implies B(X)" hole, I've never seen that particular falacy espoused quite as blatantly before.

Tom

TomThomson SSC Guru Points: 104773 More actions · Answer 7

paul.goldstraw (6/18/2014)
I made the same logical leap as Koen, most of Andy's questions include hints within the question to help rule out certain possibilities,
- On site = No Azure
- SQL 2012 = No SQL 2000
I knew sys.files didn't exist and that sys.database_files did in every DB, so corruption, which i know little about in terms of actual error messages, as unlikely as it was, remained the most likely answer

And where does the question state that all their databases are on site? Precisely nowhere.

Tom

TomThomson SSC Guru Points: 104773 More actions · Answer 8

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.

So you claim that is someone uses SQL 2012 for their on site databases that mneans they can't have any Azure databases?

Tom

TomThomson SSC Guru Points: 104773 More actions · Answer 9

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.

So you think "uses SQL 2012 for their on site databases" means "uses SQL 2012 for some of their on site databases"? It wouldn't mean that used by anyone I've ever worked with, including quite a lot of people from the far side of the pond, so I guess that it would definitely mean "all" unless there were some qualifier to soften it.

Tom

samalex SSCertifiable Points: 5429 More actions · Answer 10

Seems like it could be multiple answers because "The DBA is connected to a SQL 2000 instance" is true as well... See below (and don't ask why I still have access to a SQL 2000 server 😀 ):

Print @@VERSION;

SELECT * from sys.database_files

Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.760 (Intel X86)
Dec 17 2002 14:22:05
Copyright (c) 1988-2003 Microsoft Corporation
Enterprise Edition on Windows NT 5.0 (Build 2195: Service Pack 4)
Msg 208, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Invalid object name 'sys.database_files'.

Neil Burton SSC-Insane Points: 22999 More actions · Answer 11

TomThomson (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.
So you think "uses SQL 2012 for their on site databases" means "uses SQL 2012 for some of their on site databases"? It wouldn't mean that used by anyone I've ever worked with, including quite a lot of people from the far side of the pond, so I guess that it would definitely mean "all" unless there were some qualifier to soften it.

I think that 'uses 2012 for their on site databases' logically[/I] means that they use it for all their databases. However, that statement doesn't explicitly exclude the possibility of other editions being present. There is also not even the remotest hint that the company has cloud databases in the question. In my view that makes both answers equally likely.

Edited to make sense and remove childish sarcasm.

On two occasions I have been asked, "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.
—Charles Babbage, Passages from the Life of a Philosopher

How to post a question to get the most help http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537

Koen Verbeeck SSC Guru Points: 259105 More actions · Answer 12

gbritton1 (6/18/2014)
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.

Indeed. They could be using SQL Server 2000 for there offsite databases 😉

Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP

Koen Verbeeck SSC Guru Points: 259105 More actions · Answer 13

TomThomson (6/18/2014)
Koen Verbeeck (6/18/2014)
On site means on site. Even a private cloud is not possible, since SQL Azure is not a private cloud technology.
So you claim that is someone uses SQL 2012 for their on site databases that mneans they can't have any Azure databases?

It's all a matter of interpretation.

They use SQL 2012 for their onsite databases. You can take this that all of their databases are onsite and they use 2012.

Like this:

I brought toys for my sweet children.

--> do I have sweet children and naughty children and only the sweet ones get toys?

--> or did I brought toys for my children, which are all sweet?

Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP

Ford Fairlane SSCertifiable Points: 7664 More actions · Answer 14

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.

Have to agree 100% here....

Hope this helps...

Ford Fairlane
Rock and Roll Detective

paul.goldstraw SSCrazy Points: 2626 More actions · Answer 15

TomThomson (6/18/2014)
paul.goldstraw (6/18/2014)
I made the same logical leap as Koen, most of Andy's questions include hints within the question to help rule out certain possibilities,
- On site = No Azure
- SQL 2012 = No SQL 2000
I knew sys.files didn't exist and that sys.database_files did in every DB, so corruption, which i know little about in terms of actual error messages, as unlikely as it was, remained the most likely answer
And where does the question state that all their databases are on site? Precisely nowhere.

Where does it state that they have any databases that aren't on-site? Precisely nowhere. The question was open to interpretation, Koen described it best with his sweet children example, no sense repeating it, but it's clear that some people read on-site to mean nothing offsite, and some people took it to mean only in the context of their SQL Server 2012 databases