Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 267 total)
Hi Juanita,
First of all, you are correct that the SQL EM will not let people do anything that they don't already have permission to do. But I'm afraid that you...
February 16, 2004 at 4:20 pm
EB24,
This community is pro-SQL Server, but that does not mean we are necessarily anti-Oracle. Well, not exactly anyway. I think this (along with the extremely open-ended nature of your question)...
February 16, 2004 at 4:06 pm
Well, in this case there is so little IO that the query cost of the parallelized version is going to be unusually impacted by the query optimization phase, and also...
February 16, 2004 at 3:28 pm
I *think* I've seen PKM referred to by Microsoft as "Publishing and Knowledge Management," or something similar to that, and that MSSearch is part of Microsoft's PKM initiative. So I...
February 15, 2004 at 11:06 pm
Hi John,
Newbie or no, you are correct: you need those check constraints. But if you looke further back in this thread you'll see that we've discussed that a bit already. ...
February 15, 2004 at 10:58 pm
If I understand what you're trying to do, you might want something like this (wherever I put "etc" it's because I assume you may have other attributes you need to...
February 14, 2004 at 6:22 pm
No, I don't think that's right. Sorry...
February 14, 2004 at 6:13 pm
Well, that's interesting news! Toad has a very loyal following among the Oracle crowd - I'll have to check this out.
Thanks for the info!
February 14, 2004 at 6:11 pm
Any chance you could post a jpeg of that query plan? Or is it too big?
Thanks,
Chris
February 14, 2004 at 6:09 pm
Scott,
Have you considered putting some kind of tracer in the beginning of the trigger, before the exec statement, just to make sure that the trigger is not firing? You could...
February 13, 2004 at 11:22 pm
Are you sure you meet all the requirements for the "smart" partitioned views? Specifically, I'm talking about rules like:
February 13, 2004 at 11:16 pm
As for the claims that "all corporate consumers use RAID 5" or something similar ... that's just bunk. I have worked at places where the sysadmins would refuse to run...
February 10, 2004 at 11:01 pm
RAID 1 provides fault tolerance and generally improves read performance (but may degrade write performance).
Well, whoever put that in BOL needed to clarify what they were trying...
February 10, 2004 at 1:34 pm
Yes, RAID 10/01/1+0/0+1/SAN/etc. would be nice, but of the choices given ... RAID 5 advocates need to remember that the log needs to do flat-out writes as fast as possible. ...
February 10, 2004 at 1:30 pm
Chuffed? Is that like "cheerfully fluffed?"
February 7, 2004 at 4:10 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 267 total)