Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
wow. thank you very much, that's exactly what i want. implemented and wrapped. nice job -thank you.
February 13, 2012 at 3:50 pm
Thanks for everyone's responses. Definitely agree there is work ahead but the cost savings of managing single digit instances of SQL Server across our R+D teams is signficant.
August 27, 2010 at 7:53 pm
Thanks for the quick fire responses. We're in the financial services software business so most things do require a lot of planning 🙂 Code wise we've got some...
August 26, 2010 at 4:17 pm
Thanks Grant. Do you know if SQL does an implicit conversion (or has an impact on the optimizer) if the column in the where clause is a bigint but...
September 25, 2009 at 12:39 pm
I like it, but I've got a situation where I want to get it for each db in my instance. I've tried using the sp_MSforeachdb but can't seem to...
November 30, 2007 at 7:28 am
Interesting read. I am quite agnostic in terms of SQL Server and Oracle - both serve their purpose. Cost wise SQL Server hands down. Oracle for high-end...
May 26, 2005 at 8:59 am
I've worked with Spotlight for Oracle and that is good.... Did some brief analysis of Spotlight for SQL and its got some good features, namely - the integration with OS...
August 2, 2004 at 6:39 am
Thanks Jonathan; just another quick one on this - so is an REINDEX more log intensive than a DEFRAG or do they have the same footprint regards to the transaction...
May 5, 2004 at 7:01 am
Jonathon - I'm interested in your comment reorganising data and index pages. I'm seeing a similar problem with out logs and data - with the logs twice the size as...
May 4, 2004 at 4:25 am
tlight - we had a similar problem and it turned out to be the way we created tempdb objects and didn't destroy them on persistent sessions. We re-worked the sp's...
May 4, 2004 at 3:17 am
Sorry, I'm relatively new to SQL and from an Oracle background, the procedure - Look for locks that haven't released (sp) sounds exactly what I need at the moment. Can...
March 10, 2004 at 6:45 am
cheers mark -> thought that was the case on the sysobjects but never did confirm. would be a cool feature mr. gates (!?)
August 8, 2003 at 11:13 pm
thanks Mark. As you mentionned is a little bit of over kill but it could work. Is there anything I can do on the sysobjects table?
August 8, 2003 at 3:09 pm
Thanks very much. I was leaning towards going down that route, the client has gone with UNISYS big time would be easy to arrange. Once again, thanks.
April 24, 2003 at 11:02 am
Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)