Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 24 total)
Thanks for your input.
Did read it, but it does not address the parameterization setting causing different behaviour.
And why it does work on a SQL Server 2017 and not on a...
"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if both are frozen." -- Edward V. Berard, "Life-Cycle Approaches"
August 29, 2019 at 7:25 am
As I mentioned in my previous post: they all have the same compatibility level : 130 (SQL Server 2016).
BUT ... I kept digging and looking for differences between database settings....
"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if both are frozen." -- Edward V. Berard, "Life-Cycle Approaches"
August 29, 2019 at 6:23 am
Thanks Lynn & Scott for your answers!
I got a SQL Server 2017 box installed: and indeed on that one it works like I expected.
On the SQL Server 2016 box I...
"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if both are frozen." -- Edward V. Berard, "Life-Cycle Approaches"
August 28, 2019 at 5:34 pm
Could you provide the code of the stored procedure sp_PROC_NAME ?
I
"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if both are frozen." -- Edward V. Berard, "Life-Cycle Approaches"
October 20, 2015 at 1:25 am
Let's revive this thread to acknowledge that the bug has been fixed within SQL SERVER 2014!
(or should I open a new thread in the proper subform 🙂 )
"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if both are frozen." -- Edward V. Berard, "Life-Cycle Approaches"
May 20, 2014 at 6:51 am
Nevyn (3/18/2014)
Check the first link again. Sql links the int types to NumberStyles.Number, not NumberStyles.Integer.
My mistake, didn't catch that first link.
Both links cover what I need to know to...
"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if both are frozen." -- Edward V. Berard, "Life-Cycle Approaches"
March 18, 2014 at 6:54 am
Thanks for clarifying this!
So, it's not a bug, but rather a poor design decision 🙂
Reading the page you posted, leads me to another question: the AllowThousands entry specifies a 0...
"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if both are frozen." -- Edward V. Berard, "Life-Cycle Approaches"
March 18, 2014 at 1:31 am
Are there any other requirements related to that "reference number"?
If it is just an integer, then perhaps you could use a SEQUENCE, which is a new feature in SQL Server...
"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if both are frozen." -- Edward V. Berard, "Life-Cycle Approaches"
July 19, 2013 at 6:23 am
Possibly one or both values/columns are null.
In that case the IF NOT EXISTS will yield TRUE so the INSERT-statement will be executed.
"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if both are frozen." -- Edward V. Berard, "Life-Cycle Approaches"
June 25, 2013 at 7:37 am
Let's explain it a bit as well ...
column_name
Is an explicit column reference. Any reference to the table being modified must be correctly qualified by either the INSERTED or...
"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if both are frozen." -- Edward V. Berard, "Life-Cycle Approaches"
May 24, 2013 at 5:30 am
GilaMonster (5/23/2013)
marc.snoeys (5/22/2013)
That's a non-argument because you can't insert two or more records with the VALUES-syntax as well 😉
Like this you mean?
CREATE TABLE #test (
ID INT
)
INSERT INTO #test (ID)
VALUES (1),...
"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if both are frozen." -- Edward V. Berard, "Life-Cycle Approaches"
May 23, 2013 at 12:12 am
mister.magoo (5/22/2013)
marc.snoeys (5/17/2013)
There is nothing wrong with the INSERT-statement at all.
But, my personal opinion is that it would be more intuitive to be able to write...
"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if both are frozen." -- Edward V. Berard, "Life-Cycle Approaches"
May 23, 2013 at 12:04 am
Sergiy (5/22/2013)
marc.snoeys (5/17/2013)
There is nothing wrong with the INSERT-statement at all.
But, my personal opinion is that it would be more intuitive to be able to write...
"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if both are frozen." -- Edward V. Berard, "Life-Cycle Approaches"
May 22, 2013 at 11:48 pm
That's basically my point 🙂
There is nothing wrong with the INSERT-statement at all.
But, my personal opinion is that it would be more intuitive to be able to write an INSERT-statement...
"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if both are frozen." -- Edward V. Berard, "Life-Cycle Approaches"
May 17, 2013 at 12:22 am
Tobar (5/15/2013)
insert (ColA, ColB, ColC, ColD, ColE, ColF, ColG, ColH, ColI) values (this, that, the, other, thing, then, one, more, thing)
my eyes just do not match them...
"Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if both are frozen." -- Edward V. Berard, "Life-Cycle Approaches"
May 16, 2013 at 7:46 am
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 24 total)