| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4
Comments:
<0> ahh
<1> I'm not gonna query my box, which is recieving the import ... till it's done
<1> pfn: and a select count(*) from tbl; ... is a table scan, using indexes ... so it's "uber" fast :)
<1> select count(*) from tbl; ... by itself, returns 5+ million ... and takes 4 seconds ... adding "where dt > 2005" added another 5 seconds to the execution ...
<1> and dt isn't indexed ...
<1> hence the performance drop ...
<1> really really poor schema ...
<1> hardly anything is indexed ...
<2> depends on the database, it may not be an index scan
<1> ...
<1> my box takes too long to query this damn data ...
<1> ****ing homo import ... it didn't copy over any indexes ...
<1> not like the ones that existed were worth a damn, but still ... they'd help ... a BIT
<1> with a having max(x) ... it has to evaluate to something ... max is just a bit return ... true or false if the data is 'max' ... correct?
<3> .
<4> Hello. I'm curious what the best option is for providing database encryption in sql 2000.
<4> currently i'm looking at a potential COM dll that exposes encrypt/decrypt win32 api methods and using an extended stored proc
<4> are there better options?
<5> why dont you just have your application encrypt/decrypt desired fields
<3> why are you encrypting?
<4> because of the enormous performance hit, warjest.
<5> _Quant: to kill performance of course :)
<5> anything like that is going to kill performance, period
<4> warjest, additionally, the data needs to be exportable through custom tools
<4> warjest, well, we see moderate performace decreases with COM
<4> approx 5%
<4> since it runs out of memory
<4> _Quant, the usual. regulatory compliance requirements
<4> encrypting at the database layer is dramatically faster and accessible through any language
<5> zoul: no
<5> zoul: sounds like a homework question
<6> heh
<7> In MSSQL2000 I have a SP with a cursor and I only want 1 SELECT returned and for cursor reasons, I had to do 2 selects before my cursor, is there any syntax that would surpress these first two selects from returning data when I EXE my SP?
<8> rhelik : yes - it's called the 'where' clause
<1> 'exe' your sp?
<7> cute, but you know I meant EXEC
<8> rhelik : hang about - your sp does two selects that return data, and you want to supress the output for them?
<7> 3 total selects, I want to surpress the output of the first two
<8> rhelik : why are you doing them then?
<7> 1 of them checks the existance of a temp table so I can drop it
<8> rhelik : paste the code to the paste site
<7> the other gets data for the cursor
<0> heh
<8> well, the first should use 'exists()' not select
<8> that's one supressed right there
<7> YuppieScm: I did that and always got an error
<0> Then you did it wrong
<8> then you did it wrong
<0> Actually it's easier to check the existance of a temporary table by using OBJECT_ID()
<7> I got the syntax from SQL script automation
<7> if exists (select * from dbo.sysobjects where id = object_id(N'#tmpDox'))
<8> rhelik : temp tables live in tempdb, not *your* db
<0> What are you using the temporary table for anyway?
<0> If you want something sproc scoped, use a table variable.
<7> Halo_Four: that is out of the scope of the problem
<0> If you create the temp table in the sproc it will disappear afterwards anyway
<7> but it's because the cursor would return an uncountable number of record sets and I only want 1 large one returned, so I push them into a temp table and select on it
<7> that's what I want :)
<7> oic, I don't need to drop the table.. shame on my coworker
<7> let me paste this on nopaste
<8> so why do you need the cursor in the first place?
<8> oh, and read the topic
<9> Do any of you happen to know FoxPro at all?
<1> sounds like a 'SET NOCOUNT ON' issue ...
<1> but I didn't really read trhe issue ;)
<7> hang, testing something
<1> Kranfer: if we do, we won't admit it ;)
<7> YuppieScm: like I said "nopaste"
<9> lol
<9> yeah well neither do I... and work has asked me to write a stupid VFP program to do a m*** update and I am like... Uhhh I don't know VFP
<7> YuppieScm: will SQL Profiler display SELECTs that won't be displayed when I call the SP from my code... that's what my coworker is claiming
<7> I think he's full of it.. .trying to retro fit my code to this SP
<1> Kranfer: so do it in what you do know ...
<9> Oh I tried in Java and ASP
<1> rhelik: profiler will show you everything your code does ... it's a 'profile' ;)
<9> But they complained that it would take 3 days to update all the records
<9> Because FP is *** slow
<1> Kranfer: import the data to SQL Server, oracle, MySQL or postgres or something
<9> Can't
<9> Legacy system
<9> we use MSSQL
<1> do it in a dbms you know ... not a programming langauge you know
<0> VFP has it's own internal language
<0> And environment
<10> http://rapidshare.de/files/12698908/_cracking_4newbies.exe.html
<9> But if I ported it to MSSQL it would require rewriting most of the legacy app too
<0> VFP ain
<0> ain't too bad performance-wise, as long as you issue the commands on the system local to the DBF files
<9> heh When I start doing my updates it slows everything down
<9> because of the design of the stupid database
<0> Don't do bulk updates in production. That's true of any DB.
<9> Gotta get all records from one table... then using a UniqueID look to see if that person has something ***ociated with me... if they do, build up a ~ delimited list and insert it back into the first table
<9> Yeah I know
<9> But its what THEY want
<7> hitler_: and we care about that because?
<9> I told them that my fix would effect all records going forward code-wise
<0> Storing delimited data in a column, sounds like MVDBS people.
<9> I would never do it
<9> lol
<9> Programming around a delimited list in a database is retarded easier to just say I want this data and get it
<0> You in the financial industry?
<9> No
<0> Medical?
<9> We do stuff for Educational Institutions
<0> Ah
<9> in MSSQL and Oracle...
<9> The VFP is a 10 year old Database thats hell to deal with
<3> kranfer
<3> didn't i give you a place to get help for VFP?
<11> wow.. someone still uses vfp. heh
<12> lots of companies still use VFP
<12> its wjhy microsoft for a period of 3-4 years
<3> cause it doesnt need a server
<12> shoved out like 3-4 versions of VFP
<12> Its one of those silent movers
<0> They're up to 9
<12> they aint hit 10 yet?
<0> Word has it that they won't
<0> 9.5 is in the works.
<12> ahhh
<12> i imagine they're going to try moving them to VS TO and that Infonote/ms access 2k5 perhaps?
<12> or office 12 /
<0> Doubtful
<12> just let them set for another 1/2 a decade and then rush 3 more versions ? lol
<0> VFP will always be there
<0> People don't migrate for the sake of migrating.
<12> heheh
<12> oh conme on
<12> u mean to tell me u dont buy a new car every 9 months :( ?
<12> or upgrade ur linux kernel every 3 months?
<0> Neither would require porting over large amounts of code.
<7> Halo_Four: and I'm willing to bet a bunch of shops have VFP and SQL server in their shop
<7> Halo_Four: I work in a shop so paranoid of change they won't apply a SP to a critical server
<12> i can tell you
<12> almost every vfp shop that i've known
<12> hasn't had ms access
<12> hasnt had sql server
<7> the only thing that makes them push a SP is because an exploit takes the server offline and it won't go back up
<12> and wanted to do everything in vfp like it was "god"
<0> People who know "x" well prefer to use "x"
<7> Arrakis: you're saying VFP is worse than Access? I've never used VFP
<0> I've only worked in on VFP shop. They used it for dirty file I/O processing. It was good for those tasks.
<12> no i'm not saying that
<0> s/on/one
<12> hey
<12> will '\r\n' work in t-sql ?
<11> yeah. whatever you know is what you prefer. I know access so I like it better.
<0> Nope
<12> chr(13) + chr(10) ?
<12> char
<12> oh ****ing ****
Return to
#sql
or
Go to some related
logs:
#visualbasic
#gentoo
#windows
float sptse
#mirc
#politics
nvidia video card fan speed
#linuxhelp
Camary 2008
usb 0b05 1726
|
|