Update: Microsoft will be moving away from UserVoice sites on a product-by-product basis throughout the 2021 calendar year. We will leverage 1st party solutions for customer feedback. Learn more here.

Anonymous

My feedback

  1. 2 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  Data Factory  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Anonymous commented  · 

    Surely this could be replaced with a more generic function. Something like "DateAdd('Years',1,DateTimeValue)"

    It's amazing that they didn't think of this compared to having multiple add functions - adddays, addhours, addminuts, addseconds...

    And why not DateDiff('Years',Date1,Date2). It's like the designers of data factory have never used a programming language before!

  2. 165 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    7 comments  ·  Data Factory  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Anonymous commented  · 

    Come on guys, 5 years later and it's still "under review"?

  3. 3 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Data Factory  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Anonymous commented  · 

    Agree, the lack of support for self referencing variables is pretty silly. Surely the programmers of ADF are using "variable++" or "variable = variable + 1" in their code at some point when they build data factory. They then don't support such a design pattern... very much required.

  4. 492 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    16 comments  ·  Data Factory  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous supported this idea  · 
  5. 924 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  27 comments  ·  Data Factory  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  6. 512 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    38 comments  ·  SQL Database  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Anonymous commented  · 

    5 years later, still not there? One does wonder if you are updating Azure SQL databases at all...

  7. 114 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    planned  ·  6 comments  ·  Data Factory  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous supported this idea  · 
  8. 8 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Data Factory  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous shared this idea  · 
  9. 313 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    10 comments  ·  Data Factory  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous supported this idea  · 
  10. 319 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    23 comments  ·  Data Factory  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous supported this idea  · 
  11. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous shared this idea  · 
  12. 694 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

    Upvotes: 72

    <=-=Mar 10 2016 11:26AM=-=>

    It’s a shame that this was submitted as just a “suggestion”. It should actually be listed as a “bug” because there’s only a comparatively small set of use cases where enumeration of the result set of elements is not important.

    <=-=Mar 11 2016 12:47PM=-=>

    I agree that an order column is required; one example use case is where two lists are passed in, and ordinal positions in one list correspond to positions in the other.

    <=-=Mar 11 2016 3:12PM=-=>

    Please see the related suggestion: STRING_SPLIT needs “RemoveEmptyEntries” option, like String.Split in .NET ( https://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/2462002/ ).

    <=-=Mar 12 2016 12:02PM=-=>

    This kind of function is primarily needed for de-serializing previously serialized arrays of values of any type format-able as text.
    I therefore recommend to have the result set of this function work excellent with this use-case.

    With de-serialized arrays there is a need to…

    Anonymous supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base