TRUNCATE TABLE master..sysdatabases

According to Steve Ballmer...

Most Valuable Yak (Rob Volk) — Thu, 16 Nov 2006 18:33:55 GMT

DBA'S BABY!!!

Is XML Evil?

Most Valuable Yak (Rob Volk) — Sun, 28 Sep 2003 18:10:00 GMT

About a month ago I was asked by a contractor I work with who needed to import some very plain, fixed-width, ASCII text file data into SQL Server. In fact, this SQL Team post is very much like his situation, in that he also was going to convert PLAIN, FIXED-WIDTH, ASCII TEXT (did I mention that already?) into XML and THEN import it into SQL Server. I was absolutely floored that someone would even CONSIDER doing it this way. The only analogy I can think of is taking a haiku that perfectly expresses an idea, and then spend months or years writing a multi-volume thesis on it.

Fortunately (!) we use SQL Server 7.0 so none of the XML extensions were available for him to use. As it turned out I already had a bcp format file that could read the text format he needed to import. So, with ONE LINE OF SQL, I was able to do something he would have had to write over 100 lines of C# to parse the file, XML-ize it, and then save out to ANOTHER FILE so that he could import it (using about 12-20 lines of SQL, or more) Using bcp also would've entailed one DOS prompt command. Even DTS would've been harder to use to accomplish the same thing.

So, exactly how is XML making this process easier? Where is the ease of use and interoperability it's supposed to provide? I'm completely astounded that so many people have been so thoroughly brainwashed by the XML hype that they not only see it as the best way to do something, but as the ONLY WAY TO DO IT. How did they get that way? They don't even realize they're adding bloat that they will strip out ANYWAY when they put it into a database (man, I LOVE listening to people ask why their databases are so much smaller than an XML version of the same data)

I can't help but feel that this example is not just a (minor) lack of knowledge but also a (major) lack of common sense, and of course it's not the only one. It's like building a machine that ties your shoes for you...indeed, consider the time, effort, and money needed for research, development and production of such a machine and compare it to those made by the software industry towards XML. Normally I laugh at or ignore the more alarmist types who publish stuff about the declining state of programming and database knowledge, but now I'm not so sure. Like I stated in the SQL Team thread, we've put men on the moon without XML, and done nothing comparable with it. Why does everyone now believe it's essential for even the most mundane tasks? Maybe (?) I'm just getting old(er) and cranky(er).

Anyway, I'm posting for two reasons: first, for anyone and everyone here to contribute any similar misuses of XML that they know of. By all means be funny, entertaining, scathing, sad, however you feel about it. I'm not looking for an XML-bashing session, but it helps to know when NOT to use a thing just as much as when it should.

Second, I'm equally interested in anyone who really DOES use XML like it was intended, where it truly is the BEST way to accomplish the goal (and hopefully how you managed to work your way into using it from some other method)

And if anyone is interested, I do use XML too, but only for one project that requires a heavily formatted HTML document. XML and XSL were the best way to do it. :)

Bill Graziano For Governor of California!

Most Valuable Yak (Rob Volk) — Fri, 26 Sep 2003 03:31:00 GMT

Figured no one would remember this blog next year during the presidential election... :)

So now our rampant SQL Team egos can rant unchecked by the need to remember we too were once SQL n00bs who didn't know anything! MWUH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

I sense graz dreading the moment he gave me a blog here, and sympathize deeply.

My current blog title (TRUNCATE TABLE master..sysdatabases) may change in the future, unless overwhelmingly positive feedback or threats ask that it remain, so if you like it, let me know!

Thanks graz! Once again you've put another great thing on an otherwise dull Internet!

More Slashdot Fun, Alternative DBs, and a Book Plug

Most Valuable Yak (Rob Volk) — Thu, 21 Oct 2004 03:27:00 GMT

OK, the review is kinda lame, but the comments on this Slashdot book review are pretty good, many of them really funny...but oh so true. I won't go into my opinions of MySQL...ooops, too late.

And I just found this link for VistaDB, version 2.0 of which was recently released. I haven't heard of it before, anyone try it yet? Gotta admit, some of the praise ("I...cannot stop being thrilled with the speed") sounds pretty corny though. Don't know how it stacks up to REL, but at least it has PROPERLY FUNCTIONING foreign key constraints.

Lastly, if you do have to work with different flavors of SQL, or just want to see how the other side(s) live, SQL In a Nutshell from O'Reilly is a really good reference that covers every little nuance of all the SQL flavors out there: Oracle, SQL Server, MySQL, DB2, PostGreSQL, and some Sybase too. Kevin Kline is the author, and also President of PASS. He was kind enough to hand out a number of autographed copies at this year's PASS Community Summit, and is a terrific speaker/presenter as well. (probably gives himself the really choice presentations)

More MySQL on Slashdot

Most Valuable Yak (Rob Volk) — Thu, 28 Oct 2004 14:19:00 GMT

I almost feel like I'm making a career out of bashing MySQL. Make sure to check all the links and read the comments. Especially "Ode to a MySQL Fanboy" :) Seriously, it is probably the most succinct observation ever made.

"Ready for production", and still has the same old foreign key problems. And creating an index can destroy a table. You'll love the responses from the developer too.

Command Line SQL Server

Most Valuable Yak (Rob Volk) — Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:02:00 GMT

I've set up a new category on my blog where I plan to post some articles about using command-line utilities to perform various tasks for, or in support of, SQL Server. I'll go over the basics like bcp, osql, DOS commands, and hopefully go more in-depth on some other utilities from the Unix/Linux world that are incredibly useful. I'm hoping to even post a full case study where an existing monolithic, mission-critical VB app is replaced with command-line utilities (depends upon workload and office politics though) I won't post all of them in the main SQL Team blog page, so you should check the above link periodically if you're interested.

I've recently finished converting one small process from 140 lines of SQL down to about 30 combined lines of SQL and command-line scripting. I hope to have it written up over the weekend (1/16/05) so if you don't see it by then, make sure to harass me about it. :) And if you have any ideas, requests, or questions that you think might make a good topic please feel free to share. Worst case, you get a little free consulting.

Just a note, I'm going to use a standard admonition to "read the previous articles" for anything in this series of articles on command-line utilities. So if you see a "Part 2", "Part 3", "Part 18" and you don't remember reading the earlier parts, scroll down and read them first. :) Most of them will be cumulative.

Another note: I will be using the terms "DOS commands/prompt", "command-line/command prompt", and "Unix utilities" interchangeably. Regardless of the term, ALL of the utilities listed in this series are available for and will work on Windows platforms. Win2000, XP, and 2003 definitely, and perhaps even NT, WinME and Win98 too (I haven't tested them).

I should also point out that a command prompt can be utilized in Windows by using the Run... item on the Start menu, and putting "cmd" in the command box. cmd is the command-line interpreter for Windows.

The For Command: Part 1-1/2 - Deploy Scripts to Multiple Servers

Most Valuable Yak (Rob Volk) — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 14:34:00 GMT

Article text moved here.

The For Command: Part 2 - Multiple Tokens, AutoGenerate Files

Most Valuable Yak (Rob Volk) — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 17:03:00 GMT

Article text moved here.

Decisions, Decisions...

Most Valuable Yak (Rob Volk) — Wed, 26 Jan 2005 19:45:00 GMT

Bored with SQL Server? Looking for something new, and/or cheaper? Got a bunch of interesting alternative databases:

I've mentioned REL and VistaDB previously. VistaDB has made some significant improvements since then (including a 60% reduction in engine size, to 400KB!). It's geared towards .Net apps as a replacement for MSDE or light SQL Server duties. Go check it out.

Cloudscape was developed by IBM and they released it under an open source license last year. You can get the download here. It's written in Java and is a relational DB. Looks interesting.

PostGreSQL recently released version 8.0 and now includes a native Win32 version, so no more Cygwin troubles. This one is pretty damn solid and has a bunch of cool things SQL Server doesn't.

FireBird has been around for a bit, it's based upon the Interbase engine that Borland maintained and released to open source. Looks interesting.

Except for VistaDB, all of the above are freely available under various open-source licenses too.

And I won't bother mentioning this one again. :)

UPDATE: Yes I will! It seems MySQL is catching up with SQL Server after all!

Sometimes it's just too easy...

Most Valuable Yak (Rob Volk) — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:45:00 GMT

Yet another fair and balanced Slashdot discussion about XML databases.