July 9, 2008 at 8:14 am
davidthegray (7/9/2008)
Ok, Hugo, I followed your suggestion.If anybody think this feature would be useful, you can vote here: http://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/ViewFeedback.aspx?FeedbackID=355519
Thanks, David. You have my vote.
(BTW, did you remember to vote on it yourself?)
July 9, 2008 at 8:45 am
OK, points awarded back.
The question has also been changed to specify the cursor fitting in memory. Apologies for the delay. We had hay delivered yesterday (160 bales) and it started to rain, so work got interrupted so I could run move it into the barn.
The wish to add folders to SSMS is on the list somewhere at MS. I talked with them specifically about this and it's something the manageability team has been thinking about in future tools.
The QOtD now has a schedule system and an admin system, but I'm not sure if there's a way to get a group that can see them in advance. I'll ask the question.
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
July 9, 2008 at 9:02 am
Hugo Kornelis (7/9/2008)
davidthegray (7/9/2008)
Ok, Hugo, I followed your suggestion.If anybody think this feature would be useful, you can vote here: http://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/ViewFeedback.aspx?FeedbackID=355519
Thanks, David. You have my vote.
(BTW, did you remember to vote on it yourself?)
No, I didn't find it so honest to vote for myself. Anyway, I have already got the anser from MS:
Hi David, Thank you for your request to add folders. This has been a long standing request in the past - http://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/ViewFeedback.aspx?FeedbackID=245943. We are considering ways to better organize information in a future release of SQL Server. I'm resolving this as a duplicate. Thank you
Actually I did a scan for the word "folders" before posting my suggestion. Something wrong with the MS search engine? :w00t:
Following the link you can find another post (#209340) for the same suggestion, with lot of duplicate reference. Not surprisingly, I'm not the only one longing for that feature!
July 11, 2008 at 8:27 am
The question has a note about fitting cursor in memory. This is what BOL says about FAST _FORWARD cursors:
"The most dramatic improvement is seen when processing cursors with relatively small result sets that can be cached in the memory of an application. The fast forward-only cursor with autofetch enabled represents the most efficient method of getting a result set into an ODBC application..."
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187502.aspx
May be I overlooked something.:unsure:
July 13, 2008 at 1:47 pm
SveG (7/11/2008)
May be I overlooked something.:unsure:
Hi SveG,
I think you did.
That particular quote refers to "the fast forward-only cursor with autofetch enabled", which is a specific kind of client-side cursor (that uses similar optimizations techniques that the server-side T-SQL fast-forward cursor uses as well).
April 21, 2011 at 6:01 am
So the correct answer is "it depends" 😀
Viewing 6 posts - 61 through 65 (of 65 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply