July 29, 2009 at 7:36 am
The <strong> tags are clearly an issue with the CMS here; I've seen it in a few other code samples. I don't know if the preview works with them where the final renderer doesn't or if some people thinks they work and aren't previewing what they write, or if the code is being run through a context highlighter that isn't fully compatible with this CMS, or something else. So I knew that should be ignored.
But I still got it wrong. I said the table wouldn't be created. Why? Because I foolishly expect consistency. Most of my development is small-scale, so I usually use SSMS to design my tables and manage my indexes. When you try to create an index > 900bytes in SSMS, it says that indexes can't be over 900 bytes, and won't let you go any further.
So I accept getting this wrong, because I've learned (once again) that Microsoft's GUI tools are NOT consistent with the capabilities of their underlying engines. Maybe the lesson will stick this time...
---below here is a <strong> tag check; please ignore it---
EDIT: the <strong> tag certainly works in forum posts...
July 29, 2009 at 7:37 am
In retrospect, I think it's obvious what the intent of the question was. The problem is that everyone who has EVER answered a question here knows that subtle technicalities like this are the usual gotchas.
There are NOT 2 correct answers! Those who got it right with the "warning message" only got the correct answer by ignoring the obvious correct answer in favor of overlooking what SQL would not overlook!
What a waste of a good question about constraints.
July 29, 2009 at 7:45 am
without the it is rather obvious that the table would still be created but a warning will be given.
As long as you insert/update so combined they are smaller then 900bytes.
I choose the because of , thought i was to think about names of tables! .. so that you had the include [ ]
Create table [sales2]
(
COL1 varchar(20) not null,
COL2 varchar(600) not null,
COL3 varchar(400) not null,
date datetime not null,
Unique clustered (COL2, COL3)
)
Same as getting a error when using create table a e instead of create table [a e]
At least when giving a question make sure that the question is right!
Please remove question because a lot of people would have it right!
July 29, 2009 at 8:03 am
The tags did throw me off and I answered that the code will need to be modified. Too bad the question had this error because it was making a good point about indexes.
July 29, 2009 at 10:55 am
I didn't see any tags in the question -- perhaps someone corrected it after y'all noted a problem?
In any case, don't forget to 'drop table sales' after executing the code in your scratch database and seeing the warning ;-).
July 29, 2009 at 11:12 am
I had the correct answer as well, until I reread the question, which specifically said to run that code, and actually had a correct answer to it. Thus, 40% of those who answered got it wrong, which for a simple question as this should have been - is a bit high. I see that they have fixed the code, but are not going to give credit to those who answered it correctly and since we do not gat a 2nd chance to answer, many people lose.
Steve Jimmo
Sr DBA
“If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a Nation gone under." - Ronald Reagan
July 29, 2009 at 11:26 am
I still had the page opened to the question. When I hit refresh, the tags were gone.
July 30, 2009 at 7:30 am
sql_monkey (7/29/2009)
I still had the page opened to the question. When I hit refresh, the tags were gone.
LeChuck took them!!
:crazy:
..puts down phone and gets coat...
--------
[font="Tahoma"]I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by. -Douglas Adams[/font]
July 30, 2009 at 8:22 am
Sometimes it pays to be late to answer a question. 😉
August 24, 2009 at 6:27 pm
The question must have been corrected by the time I answered it. The sql errors with the tags did not exist when I answered this question so it was a little more straight forward.
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
November 23, 2009 at 10:22 pm
Hey I got it right.
February 28, 2010 at 8:21 pm
Oh **1t! 600+400 > 900. And I was a mathematician, once upon a time. How did I get that wrong!
Tom
February 28, 2010 at 8:32 pm
sjimmo (7/29/2009)
I had the correct answer as well, until I reread the question, which specifically said to run that code, and actually had a correct answer to it. Thus, 40% of those who answered got it wrong, which for a simple question as this should have been - is a bit high. I see that they have fixed the code, but are not going to give credit to those who answered it correctly and since we do not gat a 2nd chance to answer, many people lose.
Oh come on, points for QOTD are neither here nor there - if you can get 8 points (or whatever the number was) for knowing that you Estados Unidensians (well, I mustn't say "Yanks", must I) have fireworks on July 4th (is that scoring an indication of an anti-European bias? Probably yes, but it will be an unintentional one, and who gives a damn anyway) then who cares about 1 point for something as boring as this?
Tom
Viewing 13 posts - 16 through 27 (of 27 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply