theSystem

Question

theSystem

FibRock

Right there with Babe

Points: 726
More actions
January 30, 2008 at 10:54 pm

#378228

Comments posted to this topic are about the item theSystem
Steve
http://stevefibich.net
http://utilitydb.codeplex.com/

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)

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

Ian Yates SSCoach Points: 19738 More actions · Answer 1

I'm looking forward to the rest of the series. It's a nice departure from the usual (although still useful and definitely not mundane) stuff we all read on here.

I will have to correct you about the non-clustered indices though. They don't store the primary key in the leaf nodes. They actually store the clustered index field values in the leaf nodes. Often, or at least by default, the pkey and the clustered index are the same. If they are not the same then you may wonder what would happen if the clustered index is no longer unique... In that case MS SQL actual adds what is called a uniqifier to make the record, as far as the clustered index is concerned, unique. There's an article somewhere on this site which explains it well and in depth.

Apart from that, as I said, I'm looking forward to see how you develop your engine, etc. When I was younger I often wanted to write my own Dune 2000 clone. I never even got as far as you have in your first article! 😀

Tom Garth SSCertifiable Points: 6193 More actions · Answer 2

This is going to be interesting. I'm anxious to see the details on the UI.

Tom Garth

Tom Garth
Vertical Solutions[/url]

"There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves." -- Will Rogers

FibRock Right there with Babe Points: 726 More actions · Answer 3

Thanks for the correction; I rely on the primary key being my clustered index close to 99% of the time.

Steve
http://stevefibich.net
http://utilitydb.codeplex.com/

TimothyAWiseman SSCrazy Eights Points: 8819 More actions · Answer 4

This is one of the more interesting articles on SQL I've seen so far. I am definitely interested to see the end product.

---
Timothy A Wiseman
SQL Blog: http://timothyawiseman.wordpress.com/

Stephen E. Cook SSCrazy Points: 2275 More actions · Answer 5

I created a Black Jack game in SQL Server for kicks (could be multiplayer, with computer-controlled dealer, and you could set the number of decks and a few different rule set variations)... but this is much more ambitious!

I'm looking forward to the rest of the series.

-- Stephen Cook

sreejithsql SSCommitted Points: 1813 More actions · Answer 6

hi Steve ,

wahoooo amazing... eagerly wating for ur next series.thx for ur informations.

thx

Sreejith

MCAD

spacefacial Newbie Points: 9 More actions · Answer 7

really interesting ... one thing tho, maybe you could explain some more about the game itself ... or did I miss that?

Wayne West SSC-Insane Points: 22586 More actions · Answer 8

Very interesting, Steve. I somehow missed this post when it first appeared, very glad the third article was featured in the news letter. I used to work for a play-by-mail game company and always wanted to learn how it worked "beneath the layers", so to speak. Personally, I design card games (and publish one) and use MS Access as the repository, but that's not an interactive system.

I'm really looking forward to your future articles. Oh, and the word is "encounter", not "incounter". Sorry, I'm married to a Grammar Nazi. 😀

-----
[font="Arial"]Knowledge is of two kinds. We know a subject ourselves or we know where we can find information upon it. --Samuel Johnson[/font]