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.

tomas.nemecek

My feedback

  1. 619 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

    21 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    tomas.nemecek supported this idea  · 
  2. 551 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

    25 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    tomas.nemecek supported this idea  · 
  3. 1,873 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

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

    Unfortunately the complexity to implement dark mode into SSMS v18 is prohibitive and this item remains unplanned. Regular updates and improvements to SQL Server Management Studio are continuing, but most of the net new innovations in the graphical tooling space can be expected to be seen in Azure Data Studio.

    -Drew

    tomas.nemecek supported this idea  · 
  4. 681 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…

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    tomas.nemecek commented  · 

    I totally agree. I have a little recommendation: 1. If you add an optional int / bigint parameter that directly identifies the row I want to return as follows: SPLIT_STRING('Hello World', ' ', 0) which returns 'Hello' (first element from created "array"). This could solve problems with cardinality. 2. And for performance reasons could also contains a next optional INT / BIGINT parameter, used same as LIMIT in JavaScript Split() method: https://www.w3schools.com/jsref/jsref_split.asp . 3. And last idea is to add parameter, which returns count of not null elements in created "array", keeps cardinality - this is from my point of view nice to have.

    tomas.nemecek supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base