David Howard

My feedback

  1. 110 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    5 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  2. 997 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    100 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  3. 93 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 →
    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  4. 418 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    12 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  5. 259 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    17 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  6. 4 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 →
    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  7. 331 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  9 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  8. 50 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  1 comment  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  9. 149 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  18 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  10. 211 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  21 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  11. 338 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

    Upvotes: 249

    <=-=Oct 4 2016 2:15PM=-=>

    This is similar to my feedback located here: https://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/2769130/sql-2016-temporal-tables-with-triggers. The solution I suggest is similar to this, and could be used in many different cases developing using SQL server.

    <=-=Jan 10 2017 9:43AM=-=>

    I would love this too. The issue is that many/most applications don’t use Windows Auth in the connection to SQL Server (connection pooling issues, etc), so SQL can’t get the User information

    <=-=Jan 10 2017 9:51AM=-=>

    @Sanford

    Just to clarify, I am not asking for an “automatically store user name” feature. I’m asking for “automatically store whatever I want, based on whatever expression I provide.” So the fact that the user name may or may not be available is not really relevant.

    That said, there are plenty of workarounds for various situations. I imagine that if you’re using a shared connection, you can get some notion of “user” some other…

    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  12. 462 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    21 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  13. 57 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 » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  14. 295 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

    Upvotes: 127

    <=-=Jun 23 2015 8:37AM=-=>

    I’m the first to post a useful comment. This must make me special.

    Seriously though, this would be an excellent solution to having to create a new “scratchdb” to hold my interim ETL data. This would be a major plus in simplifying design of a high performance app.

    <=-=Jul 3 2015 5:04AM=-=>

    In 2014, memory optimized tables, and delayed durability can be used help mitigate these Issues. However neither of this are always completely viable solutions. Brent’s proposed solution is likely the simplest way to achieve this with the least amount of unwanted impact. It is important to note that other platforms implement similar functionality as well. Notably Oracle.

    <=-=Nov 29 2016 3:58PM=-=>

    There are so many good things about this suggestion. I am amazed that SQL does not have the capability to turn off logging for certain tables that you define as no…

    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  15. 175 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

    Upvotes: 278

    <=-=Feb 1 2008 7:18PM=-=>

    Thanks for the valuable suggestion.

    This seems more like adding the sequence support which we’re seriously considering for the next major release.

    Meanwhile, would using identity column help?

    <=-=Feb 2 2008 2:11AM=-=>

    It does not seem that you understood the request. This definitely has nothing to do with
    IDENTITY. I am less versed about sequences, but I don’t think they will cut it either. If you think
    it does, maybe you could provide an example? Take this problem: For the Orders table in
    Northwind, write a query that lists the number of orders for all days in 1997. The result set should
    include all 365 days, and list zero for days without a number.

    This is a typical problem where you need a table of of numbers (or dates). While it’s easy to
    create such a table, I argue in this request that…

    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  16. 460 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    16 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  17. 103 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

    Object Explorer doesn’t populate the entire tree in memory, unlike visual studio’s solution explorer. It wouldn’t know if database “MyDatabase” existed until you expanded the Databases node.
    There are third party plugins that provide this type of functionality, I believe, by downloading a bunch of data in the background and exposing a search.

    David Howard supported this idea  · 
  18. 423 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

    Upvotes: 8

    <=-=Mar 5 2017 2:42PM=-=>

    Thanks for this idea. This is a valid requirement and I hope that it will get more votes. Currently we cannot confirm when it will be added, but it is in our backlog.

    <=-=May 22 2017 5:03AM=-=>

    would like it very much, particularly since you already have the CONCAT / GREATEST() a variable number of paramenters and does something with it…

    <=-=Jun 5 2017 12:31PM=-=>

    GREATEST / LEAST functions would be fantastic addition.

    <=-=Nov 14 2017 3:42PM=-=>

    The workarounds using CROSS APPLY or CASE expressions are difficult to manage and read. I’d love to see these implemented.

    David Howard supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base