Hans Lindgren

My feedback

  1. 2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Upvotes: 7

    <=-=Sep 3 2009 9:08AM=-=>

    Thank you for your feedback; this is a known issue and I’ve closed your bug as a duplicate of the work item we are tracking to fix this issue in our next major release.

    Thanks,

    Amy Lewis

    <=-=Sep 14 2009 4:48PM=-=>

    This needs to be fixed for R2. We run some jobs like log shipping backup/copy/restore at an interval of every 1 minute. This generates a huge amound of unnecessary log/history records that need to be cleaned up on a regular basis. Our current hardware architecure and msdb location does not support this kind of unrestricted growth. Please re-activate this bug and fix it for the next CTP release. – Eric Holling

    <=-=Sep 14 2009 10:30PM=-=>

    Hi Amy,
    We need this fixed in R2, please check the comments in the community forum by Eric Holling as below:

    “This needs to be fixed for R2.…

    Hans Lindgren supported this idea  · 
  2. 311 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  12 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Hans Lindgren supported this idea  · 
  3. 10 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  4 comments  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Hans Lindgren supported this idea  · 
  4. 10 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Hans Lindgren supported this idea  · 
  5. 15 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    planned  ·  0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Hans Lindgren supported this idea  · 
  6. 20 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Hans Lindgren supported this idea  · 
  7. 37 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Upvotes: 57

    <=-=Feb 8 2017 2:13PM=-=>

    We disallow ALL use of the PRIMARY filegroup on the premise that any use of PRIMARY is unauthorized, and PRIMARY is set to a small size with no autogrow. Since the Query Store on very active servers with non-parameterized workloads grows very, very fast, setting it to a filegroup whose data file is on a specific LUN (based on speed and cost, i.e. a specific storage tier) is vital.

    <=-=Apr 2 2017 7:56AM=-=>

    Thank you for taking time to post this issue! We understand that this could be an important issue for you.

    We get a lot of feedback regarding PRIMARY filegroup from the field and many MVPs. �
    This item is high on our priory list, but unfortunately, we do not plan to include a fix for this issue in the upcoming release. Although, we might include it as an improvement in future…

    Hans Lindgren supported this idea  · 
  8. 41 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    3 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Upvotes: 407

    <=-=Oct 11 2007 4:28AM=-=>

    ANS SQL 99 actualy defines a syntax (section 11.49) for function definition that can be used for an inline scalar function (body consisting of a single RETURN statement) – inlining being an implementation rather than a definitional issue. There are other database products (e.g. IBM DB2 UDB) that already support this, so going the ANS way would assist portability.

    The enhancement is clearly necessary.

    <=-=Oct 11 2007 8:45AM=-=>

    In other programming languages, this might be a macro expansion, where an include file contains the macro, which expands into inline code at compile time. (I believe that this was discussed as a possibility in the very early days of Yukon.) In any case, however implemented, Inline Scalar UDF would be a major improvement over the speed-bump that exists now.

    I was going to post this myself, but happily add my vote to the existing…

    Hans Lindgren supported this idea  · 
  9. 69 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    3 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Upvotes: 176

    <=-=Nov 13 2007 12:37AM=-=>

    Hello

    Thank you for your feedback. We’re certainly considering row value constructors for a future release of SQL Server.

    - Sara Tahir
    Microsoft SQL Server

    <=-=Aug 11 2010 8:03AM=-=>

    I think row constructors would be a great and important addition to T-SQL. Just wanted to point out a few more cases that I’d love to see implemented:


    - Assignment
    -
    —————————————————————————————————-

    UPDATE dbo.T1
    SET (c1, c2, c3) = (@p1, @p2, @p3)
    WHERE keycol = @key;

    — Logically equivalent to:

    UPDATE dbo.T1
    SET c1 = @p1,
    c2 = @p2,
    c3 = @p3
    WHERE keycol = @key;

    — Or with a subquery:

    UPDATE dbo.T1
    SET (c1, c2, c3) = (SELECT T2.c1, T2.c2, T2.c3
    FROM T2
    WHERE T2.keycol = T1.keycol)
    WHERE keycol = @key;

    — Logically equivalent to:
    UPDATE dbo.T1
    SET c1 = (SELECT T2.c1
    FROM T2
    WHERE T2.keycol = T1.keycol),
    c2 =…

    Hans Lindgren supported this idea  · 
  10. 97 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  2 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Hans Lindgren supported this idea  · 
  11. 67 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  8 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Hans Lindgren supported this idea  · 
  12. 2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Hans Lindgren supported this idea  · 
  13. 670 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    95 comments  ·  Virtual Machines  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Hans Lindgren supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base