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.

Paul White

My feedback

  1. 9 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

    0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  2. 12 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

    2 comments  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  3. 2 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

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

    Upvotes: 69

    <=-=Jan 19 2010 1:03AM=-=>

    I agree, this is absolutely required. The SSIS dataflow is heavily reliant upon metadata from data sources and stored procedures do not provide any such metadata.

    <=-=Jan 19 2010 3:22AM=-=>

    One other thought….if we were to impose contracts on the sproc resultset(s) why shouldn’t the same be true of the return value?
    Could we have sproc return types that are something other than integers?
    Could we have sproc return types that are constrained either by DDL or entries in a table?

    Just a thought!

    <=-=Jan 19 2010 6:41AM=-=>

    Jamie, why would you need something other than integers for return types? Isn’t this what output parameters are for? You shouldn’t be using return values to return data, IMHO.

    <=-=Jan 19 2010 2:37PM=-=>

    Hey Jamie, great point on the return values. I’ve done an update here with my thoughts on it: http://sqlblog.com/blogs/greg_low/archive/2010/01/20/stored-procedure-contracts-return-values.aspx

    <=-=Jan 20…
    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  4. 320 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

    18 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  5. 335 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

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

    From Apr 24, 2019 (https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2019/04/24/sql-server-management-studio-ssms-18-0-released-for-general-availability/):
    Think of these two tools not as separate tools doing different things, but as one integrated tool. Each tool has different experiences built into it and can be launched from the other seamlessly.

    From Oct 20,2020 (https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/sqlserver/2020/10/20/sql-server-management-studio-18-7-now-generally-available/):
    SQL Server Management Studio is a foundational tool for many working with Microsoft data solutions. First released in 2018, Azure Data Studio is a cross-platform and open source desktop environment for data professionals using the Azure Data family of on-premises and cloud data platform solutions. Architecturally, SQL Server Management Studio has long been combined with additional tools, including Profiler, Database Engine Tuning Advisor (DTA), and Database Mail. As Azure Data Studio continues to mature, the Microsoft data tools experience on Windows has become a combination of SSMS and Azure Data Studio. Beginning in the 18.7 release of SQL Server Management Studio, Azure Data Studio…

    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  6. 11 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

    0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Paul White shared this idea  · 
  7. 7 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

    0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  8. 7 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

    1 comment  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  9. 19 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

    0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  10. 45 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

    under review  ·  1 comment  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  11. 5 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

    0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Paul White shared this idea  · 
  12. 5 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

    0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  13. 2 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

    0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  14. 62 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

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

    Upvotes: 29

    <=-=Jul 27 2016 5:17PM=-=>

    This feature vastly simplifies development of certain types of applications. Would be interesting at least know if microsoft has some intention to implement it.

    <=-=Jul 27 2016 5:19PM=-=>

    A fully compliant implementation to ansi sql 2011 would nice too.

    <=-=Jul 28 2016 1:01AM=-=>

    I would also like to see bitemporal support added, it would be most useful!

    <=-=Mar 7 2017 11:54AM=-=>

    This feature would really help people trying to migrate their DBs from DB2 or Oracle to SQL Server that much easier.

    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  15. 8 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

    5 comments  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  16. 6 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

    0 comments  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  17. 54 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

    5 comments  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  18. 7 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

    1 comment  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  19. 2 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

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

    Upvotes: 11

    <=-=Jul 7 2016 8:01AM=-=>

    I would like to add some observations.
    There is Concatenation operator (related to UNION processing) in the query plan.
    The query returns correct result (12 rows) after changing the way UNION is processed (just add query hint):

    select
    man_id, wife_id,
    (select count(*)
    from (
    select dummy from dual
    union select men.wife_id
    ) family_members
    ) as family_size
    from men
    -- uncomment one of the options below
    —option (hash union)
    —option (merge union)

    Also if you replace `select dummy from dual` with `select 0 as dummy`, the query will return correct result. But if you change query option as below, it will return incorrect result again:

    select
    man_id, wife_id,
    (select count(*)
    from (
    select 0 as dummy
    union select men.wife_id
    ) family_members
    ) as family_size
    from men
    —option (concat union)

    So, may be problem is related to UNION and not to Index Spool, or may…

    Paul White supported this idea  · 
  20. 6 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

    1 comment  ·  SQL Server » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Paul White supported this idea  · 
← Previous 1 3

Feedback and Knowledge Base