March 14, 2012 at 11:51 am
jcrawf02 (3/14/2012)
IT'S A BOY!!!I won't get to meet him for a few months still, but very excited!
So now the important question is, do we let him watch Star Wars in the episode order, or the real order?
Value order:
4, 5 Done.
----------------------------------------------------The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood... Theodore RooseveltThe Scary DBAAuthor of: SQL Server 2017 Query Performance Tuning, 5th Edition and SQL Server Execution Plans, 3rd EditionProduct Evangelist for Red Gate Software
March 14, 2012 at 11:57 am
Grant Fritchey (3/14/2012)
jcrawf02 (3/14/2012)
IT'S A BOY!!!I won't get to meet him for a few months still, but very excited!
So now the important question is, do we let him watch Star Wars in the episode order, or the real order?
Value order:
4, 5 Done.
hahaha! Cliffhangers be damned, eh?
---------------------------------------------------------
How best to post your question[/url]
How to post performance problems[/url]
Tally Table:What it is and how it replaces a loop[/url]
"stewsterl 80804 (10/16/2009)I guess when you stop and try to understand the solution provided you not only learn, but save yourself some headaches when you need to make any slight changes."
March 14, 2012 at 12:00 pm
GilaMonster (3/14/2012)
In release order. 4, 5, 6, 1, 2, 3
+1. Go with release order. No matter how bad #1 is, it's part of the series. And part of numerous jokes where context is important.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMoI2Fy2DgM&feature=related
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
My Blog: www.voiceofthedba.com
March 14, 2012 at 12:08 pm
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (3/14/2012)
GilaMonster (3/14/2012)
In release order. 4, 5, 6, 1, 2, 3+1. Go with release order. No matter how bad #1 is, it's part of the series. And part of numerous jokes where context is important.
I have to say, if you're going to watch them all, I think the argument for 4, 5, 1, 2, 3, 6 is a good one because then you don't know then end before you start watching 1, 2 and 3
--------------------------------------
When you encounter a problem, if the solution isn't readily evident go back to the start and check your assumptions.
--------------------------------------
It’s unpleasantly like being drunk.
What’s so unpleasant about being drunk?
You ask a glass of water. -- Douglas Adams
March 14, 2012 at 12:15 pm
Back on topic, yes, they definitely are: http://qa.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/FindPost1266924.aspx
-- Gianluca Sartori
March 14, 2012 at 12:36 pm
Gianluca Sartori (3/14/2012)
Back on topic, yes, they definitely are: http://qa.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/FindPost1266924.aspx
Yes, I can think of a large number of ways not to use a linked server, most will probably be of no interest to the OP though
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
March 14, 2012 at 12:39 pm
GilaMonster (3/14/2012)
Gianluca Sartori (3/14/2012)
Back on topic, yes, they definitely are: http://qa.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/FindPost1266924.aspxYes, I can think of a large number of ways not to use a linked server, most will probably be of no interest to the OP though
I'd love to hear them, I'm sure there are some I've never heard of/thought of.
--------------------------------------
When you encounter a problem, if the solution isn't readily evident go back to the start and check your assumptions.
--------------------------------------
It’s unpleasantly like being drunk.
What’s so unpleasant about being drunk?
You ask a glass of water. -- Douglas Adams
March 14, 2012 at 12:57 pm
Stefan Krzywicki (3/14/2012)
GilaMonster (3/14/2012)
Gianluca Sartori (3/14/2012)
Back on topic, yes, they definitely are: http://qa.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/FindPost1266924.aspxYes, I can think of a large number of ways not to use a linked server, most will probably be of no interest to the OP though
I'd love to hear them, I'm sure there are some I've never heard of/thought of.
SSIS (stage the remote data required locally)
Replication (real-time copy of the remote data stored locally)
Service Broker (for those who find replication too easy)
OpenRowSet (Security be damned)
CLR with External Access permissions
sp_OA* (for those who find CLR too safe)
Custom written .NET app that goes out and fetches the required data then loads it into a table
Invoke a SQLAgent job that bcps the required data out to a file which can be BULK INSERTed
Silly enough towards the end?
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
March 14, 2012 at 1:02 pm
GilaMonster (3/14/2012)
Stefan Krzywicki (3/14/2012)
GilaMonster (3/14/2012)
Gianluca Sartori (3/14/2012)
Back on topic, yes, they definitely are: http://qa.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/FindPost1266924.aspxYes, I can think of a large number of ways not to use a linked server, most will probably be of no interest to the OP though
I'd love to hear them, I'm sure there are some I've never heard of/thought of.
SSIS (stage the remote data required locally)
Replication (real-time copy of the remote data stored locally)
Service Broker (for those who find replication too easy)
OpenRowSet (Security be damned)
CLR with External Access permissions
sp_OA* (for those who find CLR too safe)
Custom written .NET app that goes out and fetches the required data then loads it into a table
Invoke a SQLAgent job that bcps the required data out to a file which can be BULK INSERTed
Silly enough towards the end?
No. The end is too close to reality.
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
March 14, 2012 at 2:11 pm
SQLRNNR (3/14/2012)
GilaMonster (3/14/2012)
Stefan Krzywicki (3/14/2012)
GilaMonster (3/14/2012)
Gianluca Sartori (3/14/2012)
Back on topic, yes, they definitely are: http://qa.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/FindPost1266924.aspxYes, I can think of a large number of ways not to use a linked server, most will probably be of no interest to the OP though
I'd love to hear them, I'm sure there are some I've never heard of/thought of.
SSIS (stage the remote data required locally)
Replication (real-time copy of the remote data stored locally)
Service Broker (for those who find replication too easy)
OpenRowSet (Security be damned)
CLR with External Access permissions
sp_OA* (for those who find CLR too safe)
Custom written .NET app that goes out and fetches the required data then loads it into a table
Invoke a SQLAgent job that bcps the required data out to a file which can be BULK INSERTed
Silly enough towards the end?
No. The end is too close to reality.
Okay, read the thread and I'm walking away quietly. Hey! Party at the Tent in the Desert! I'm sure the Guard Hippo is lonely.
March 14, 2012 at 2:24 pm
jcrawf02 (3/14/2012)
IT'S A BOY!!!I won't get to meet him for a few months still, but very excited!
So now the important question is, do we let him watch Star Wars in the episode order, or the real order?
Congrats!
Release order.
Otherwise the big "Luke, I'm your father" moment is reduced to duuuuh.
Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP
March 14, 2012 at 2:25 pm
Gianluca Sartori (3/14/2012)
Back on topic, yes, they definitely are: http://qa.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/FindPost1266924.aspx
I actually laughed out loud.
Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP
March 14, 2012 at 2:26 pm
GilaMonster (3/14/2012)
jcrawf02 (3/14/2012)
I don't know, that's always bothered me because he never went back before then to even check on her (at least we're not told that) but he's got this immense attachment that he's hiding somewhere.Jedi aren't supposed to have attachments. Their loyalties are the the Force, the Order, the Republic and to themselves and no other. "A Jedi is a Jedi, first, foremost and only. For a Jedi to divide his attentions between the will of the Force and the will of others is to invite disaster" Master Hoche Trit ~1000 BBY
Hence he would have been encouraged not to check up on her.
It's worth noting that the prohibition of attachments was a reasonably late rule of the Order, it was only in effect from the time of the battle of Rusaan (~1000 BBY) until the destruction of the Order by Palpatine and Vader. So 1000 years out of the 25 000 year history.
Sorry, when I play in Starwars RPGs I tend to play Jedi, so I can spout off portions of the Code
I suppose that makes more sense.
---------------------------------------------------------
How best to post your question[/url]
How to post performance problems[/url]
Tally Table:What it is and how it replaces a loop[/url]
"stewsterl 80804 (10/16/2009)I guess when you stop and try to understand the solution provided you not only learn, but save yourself some headaches when you need to make any slight changes."
March 14, 2012 at 2:57 pm
Koen Verbeeck (3/14/2012)
Gianluca Sartori (3/14/2012)
Back on topic, yes, they definitely are: http://qa.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/FindPost1266924.aspxI actually laughed out loud.
Well it's one of our old friends, so are you that surprised?
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
March 14, 2012 at 2:59 pm
GilaMonster (3/14/2012)
jcrawf02 (3/14/2012)
I don't know, that's always bothered me because he never went back before then to even check on her (at least we're not told that) but he's got this immense attachment that he's hiding somewhere.Jedi aren't supposed to have attachments. Their loyalties are the the Force, the Order, the Republic and to themselves and no other. "A Jedi is a Jedi, first, foremost and only. For a Jedi to divide his attentions between the will of the Force and the will of others is to invite disaster" Master Hoche Trit ~1000 BBY
Hence he would have been encouraged not to check up on her.
It's worth noting that the prohibition of attachments was a reasonably late rule of the Order, it was only in effect from the time of the battle of Rusaan (~1000 BBY) until the destruction of the Order by Palpatine and Vader. So 1000 years out of the 25 000 year history.
Sorry, when I play in Starwars RPGs I tend to play Jedi, so I can spout off portions of the Code
I'm sorry, I have to ask. If they could have attachments for the first 24,000 years why did this one Jedi Master decide it was bad? Seems like it could create tensions that might add to a young Jedi falling prey to the Dark Side.
Viewing 15 posts - 34,741 through 34,755 (of 66,000 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply